sadly, "Producers" film continues to tank at B.O. — Page 2

i guess i'm the only one here who actually liked the movie

---

The Producers isn't even playing in the theater closest to where I live, which is kind of surprising, because it's one of those huge theatres that always seems to show *everything*. And I live in New York City, so I thought for sure, that, even if it didn't open wide, that I'd get to see it.

I was wary of seeing how they'd changed it, of course, but I still wanted to have the option, at the very least.

---

I also liked THE PRODUCERS tremendously. It took me a while, but I finally saw it today. While THE PRODUCERS could have used some more editing, especially in the parts where it seemed as if the director were expecting applause from a film audience, the film was still well done. I had a good time and I laughed a lot, which is what a musical comedy film is supposed to do.

Of the two recently released film adapations of Broadway musicals, I definitely prefer THE PRODUCERS over RENT.

I watched as the scene in the office moved along at a snails pace and all I could think of was how much funnier Zero, Gene and Estelle Winwood were. The whole film was way too stagey. I was very disappointed.

Well, they could have gotten seven bucks out of me and I could have told you if I liked it or not, but it didn't play anywhere near me! And I really wanted to see it. I was surprised that Rent played, since virtually nobody in my nick of the woods seems to give a hoot about theater.

---

Ray, I won't beat the horse by repeating what has been said on many other threads discussing how this movie was filmed. You can find them by doing a search.

But, you can't compare Marshall's decisions in Chicago to the Producers...this movie was MEANT to be like an old-fashioned movie...not re-conceived to play out as a movie taking place in theaters, bars, etc...it is a love letter to 30s and 40s musicals, not a slick, glitzy MTV version of today's film musicals like Moulin Rouge and Chicago.

So you really can't compare them. Stroman's style was faithful to the oldies...with lots of close ups, lots of rich color and big, broad performances.

For the rest of the historical and analytical info, do a search and find the other threads on this topic.

Just got the Variety numbers for Monday a.m. (from full week last week and weekend). The movie is hardly 'tanking'

Brokeback has made $16,937,528 in 4 weeks in release

Producers has made $15,230,286 in 3 weeks in release
Weekend totals for 978 screens (NOT reduced screens which typically happens when the theater is not making money on the film) $5,110,290 (a 55% POSITIVE CHANGE IN WEEKEND BOX OFFICE)

---

Updated On: 1/9/06 at 09:42 AM

^ I agree. The artificiality and fantasy-Hollywood type filming this movie was done in is why I am so fond of it.

It's amazing that a good film like "The Producers" does so horribly at the box office, and a terrible film like "Hostel" is doing very well."The Producers" at least was given a 7 out of 10 by Jess Cagle, "Hostel" got a Zero.

I LOVED every minute of this movie, it is my favorite film. Both times I saw it, the audience laughed and loved it. I loved Nathan as Max, Matthew as Leo, Will as Franz, Roger as Carmen, Gary as Roger, and Uma as Ulla. The only thing I found weird about this movie was that I felt Matthew made Leo more psychotic than neurotic, especially in the scene after "I Wanna Be A Producer" when he runs to Nathan and screams "I'm Back".

I cannot wait for this to be on dvd. I'll be watching it repeatedly, and I'll be travelling to the St.James less than I did before the movie.
________________________________________________________________
"There is alot more to me than there is to me. Stop the World, I want to get on!"
-The Producers

Things aren't looking good for the Producers, but it'll get better if it makes it to wide release. I just PRAY it recoups its investment.

However, I have few doubts that Dreamgirls will do well. It's marketable to so many different age groups, from the MTV-watching tweens to sophisticated audiences that appreciate the work of Condon and Foxx.

We'll see, I guess. But if "The Producers", "Rent", and "The Phantom of the Opera" don't make money, even if "Dreamgirls" does, I don't see how anyone expects "Sweeney Todd" and "Hairpsray" to do well.

I sound like a broken record with this, but Phantom did make $150 million worldwide and was the #2 selling CD soundtrack of 2005 and also made a killing on DVD.

Rent well, yeah, it stands to lose about 10 million + marketing costs, but if the DVD goes well it won't lose that much.

A lot of movies tank and lose a LOT more money than Rent and the Producers will lose. Here are some recent samples:

Aeon Flux
Budget:62 million
US gross: 25 million

Zathura
Budget: 65 million
US gross: 28 million

Lord of War
Budget: 50 million
US gross: 24 million

Doom:
Budget: 60 million
US gross: 28 million

So as you can see, studios are sort of used to movies tanking. The big hits offset the misses.

Even if every movie musical tanked (and $30 million is not bad at all for Rent, if the budget had been $25 million), there is still some kind of market for it. Any fool could see that.

I mean, look at all the junk that comes direct to DVD... sequels to teen movies, cartoons, prowrestling. There is definitely a market for musicals if there is a market for all this other stuff.

Updated On: 1/9/06 at 07:29 PM

Well said Auggie!

Well, the 'eels and caves' comment was actually made to her by her Geisha "mother", and those are her memoirs, so they couldn't leave it out. And I'd rather have broken english than subtitles. Haven't seen Memoirs yet, but loved the book.

I wish Producers was doing better too. I didn't love it, but it was entertaining.

Hostel looks horrible...

they should of expanded it to more theatres awhile ago. now the hype for the movie is gone and if they did expand it more it will do poorly. i think they were hoping for it to turn out like chicago where it slowly expanded but producers isn't going to get any oscars to keep the box office up like chicago did.