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

[Caroline-Q-or-TBoo]

Posted: 1/8/06 at 9:46pm

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

[lovinlovett]

Posted: 1/8/06 at 10:09pm

No you're not alone! Read my posts above, I loved it!

[Dramatic_Irony]

Posted: 1/8/06 at 10:16pm

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.

[YankeeGal#24]

Posted: 1/8/06 at 10:30pm

Loved the film, have seen in three times, and will see it again. Lots of fun!

[jsg03jd]

Posted: 1/8/06 at 11:14pm

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.

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 1/9/06 at 12:13am

I also enjoyed it, surprisingly (I was underwhelmed by the stage show, which had a lacklustre cast when I saw it). I thought Will Farrell stole the show, and Broderick was the weak link.

Oddly, I think the film would play more naturally (to a contemporary audience, anyway) on VHS/DVD. We're so used to watching those old-style movie musicals at home that I found it a bit jarring to have it splayed all over the big screen.

[alterego]

Posted: 1/9/06 at 7:04am

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.

[Sumofallthings]

Posted: 1/9/06 at 7:06am

I absolutely adored the film. I thought at first that Broderick was terrible but after seeing it a second time it is a character choice the way he reads his lines. It's still kind of obnoxious but I can tell it's intentional.

[collins]

Posted: 1/9/06 at 8:19am

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.

[TheEnchantedHunter]

Posted: 1/9/06 at 8:29am

"Hopefully Dreamgirls will be a big hit next year. It has a lot of star power and Oscar potential."

I dunno. Audiences always snicker when the trailer comes on in movie theaters.


Norma Desmond
Hollywood, California

[SamIAm]

Posted: 1/9/06 at 9:42am

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

[roquat]

Posted: 1/9/06 at 3:21pm

Frankly, I think the "stagey" techniques the critics obsessed about were the strength of the movie. It never pretended to be in the real world for a second--in the very first shot, the camera descends into an obvious never-neverland studio-set "Broadway", and we're greeted by singing theatre ushers with showgirl smiles. From that moment on, the movie exists in a sphere all its own.

I'm going to go out on a limb and risk cries of "Blasphemy!"--I enjoyed this new version much more than the original. If you want to talk "stagey", check out the heavy, oversold antics of Zero Mostel, which do not work on camera (and half the time his face seems squashed against the lens.) I found Nathan Lane much more nimble and inspired (how many actors in their mid-forties are still taking pratfalls as gracefully as this?) And Susan Stroman's staging is elegant and beautifully timed--the audiences I saw it with (and I saw it twice in a theatre, which I NEVER do) laughed nonstop and stayed all the way to the priceless final gag.

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 1/9/06 at 3:32pm

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

[bschneid76]

Posted: 1/9/06 at 3:40pm

I really don't see this as a bad film, HOSTEL is a bad film and that's at the top of the B.O. Charts. Why does The Producers have be like Rent or Chicago, you couldn't even tell if anyone was dancing due to all the cuts, sure I loved Chicago, but the way the producers is filmed is so much different. Watch all the movie musicals from the "Golden Age" of Movie Musicals in the 40s and 50s, they are considered classics, and The Producers maybe not as flashy as movies are these days, but it is a great piece of film, and you actually can follow along without the flashy camera moves. Also, how can someone say it has mediocre songs? it's the SAME songs from the stage show that had a terrific success? That boggles me.

[worrell4077]

Posted: 1/9/06 at 4:13pm

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

[Unknown User]

Posted: 1/9/06 at 5:57pm

SamIam - are you kidding? Brokeback was in 200 theaters for 3 out of the 4 weeks and is now only up to 400

Where the Producers is in 1000 theaters. I saw Producers and liked it, but its a flop!!!

[inlovewithjerryherman]

Posted: 1/9/06 at 6:47pm

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.

[bill mobley]

Posted: 1/9/06 at 7:05pm

I usually am not so way off base as I am with this film. I saw the faults in the movie as I was watching (Matthew tried too hard on the song "That Face)." And the dance routine where the fat girl is played for laughs (all the other girls were supposedly beautiful) seemed outdated. But as a musical it is not that bad. I didn't see the first version of "The Producers" maybe that's why I was so impressed by the script. I can't believe all the criticism this movie is getting. The movie version of this is better than most of the versions of Annie. For me, Susan succeeds in bringing the excitement, the feel, of a broadway show to the screen. I did nod off a couple of times during the movie, but I nodded off on The Lord of the Ring movies also. I've seen bad movies, this is not one of them.

[phantom8019]

Posted: 1/9/06 at 7:29pm

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

[Auggie27]

Posted: 1/9/06 at 8:00pm

SamIam, you need to learn how to read box office numbers.

As of the updated Monday afternoon numbers: THE PRODUCERS was 16th, having never cracked the top ten, making only 2.2 million this weekend, with, critically: a per screen average of a mere $2395. It has made $15,116,000 TOTAL in 4 weeks of release, against a 45 million budget, and not including advertising. Comparing its 15 million to Brokeback's 22 million is rather silly, in light of BROKEBACK's per screen of 11,800 (5 times the per screen of PRODUCERS, while in half as many theaters) By any standards, this film simply is not a success. Yet you say? Okay, but the per screen average tells you how much interest is out there.

And please, let's not dump it failure on critics alone. HOSTEL had all negative reviews -- some calling it vile -- and made that obscene amount. But getting people in the seats is ever more difficult, and no one out there thought "I'm gonna go see that Uma Thurman/Will Farrell movie."

I agree that PRODUCERS will have a long life on DVD, and probably its core base of fans will made the DVD sales healthy. And a popular rental.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 1/9/06 at 8:32pm

Well said Auggie!

[chasgoose]

Posted: 1/10/06 at 12:42am

To all the Hostel haters out there, it actually got better reviews than The Producers according to Rotten Tomatoes. I can't imagine anything being more excruciating to sit through this holiday season, except maybe the abysmal Memoirs of a Geisha with its broken English speaking pan-Asian cast and horrible references to eels and caves.

[Kass983]

Posted: 1/10/06 at 5:57am

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...

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 1/15/06 at 8:23pm

Not even in the top 20 this week.
Thats sad - I loved the show but the movie should have had a different director who understood film and Matthew Broderick SUCKS!

[musicalfandukie]

Posted: 1/15/06 at 8:37pm

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.