|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WEEKEND BOX-OFFICE
Audiences
love 'robots in disguise'!!!
I think TRANSFORMERS 2's record-shattering opening
over the past 5 days has, at the very least, proven one thing:
when it comes to summer "blockbuster" movies, film
critic reviews don't matter for shit!! Despite negative reviews
across the board from critics (only 1 out of every 5 critics
enjoyed the film according to Rotten
Tomatoes), it seems as though "regular audience"
members (you know, those who actually matter!!) could care less,
and just wanted to check out a film offering some uber-escapism.
Even though the film wasn't able to beat THE DARK KNIGHT's $203M
opening record in 5 days, it almost did with a little over
$201M in the first 5 days of its release.
Its actual 3-day weekend gross wasn't as
impressive, finishing 7th on the all-time
list, with $112M over the weekend, which was about $46M less
than THE DARK KNIGHT's $158M opening weekend. Needless to say, it
was the film's opening day take of $60M (on Wednesday) which
managed to really boost its numbers. That opening placed it right
behind TDK which had opened with $67M on its first day (wasn't
director Michael Bay bitching to the studio about it not promoting
the film enough or something??!).
The film is already in 3rd
place for all films released in 2009, right behind UP and STAR
TREK. In the meantime, last week's #1 movie, THE PROPOSAL, lost
about 45% of its audience from last weekend, but stayed strong in
2nd place. THE HANGOVER also continued its solid run, losing only
35% of its audience from last weekend, while slipping over the
$180M mark overall. The weekend's only other new release, MY
SISTER'S KEEPER did 'alright' with a 5th place opening and about
$12M in receipts.
The summer's 2nd official "bust" movie
was YEAR ONE (after LAND OF THE LOST), as it lost 70% of its
audience after its so-so opening last weekend (I guess critics
don't matter, but "word of mouth" does!), dropping it to
6th place during its second week of release, and raising its total
to about $32M (the film apparently cost about $60M to make). Three
big summer movies dropped out of the top 10 this weekend including
LAND OF THE LOST ($47M), TERMINATOR SALVATION ($121M) and IMAGINE
THAT ($14M) -- actually, I suppose that Eddie Murphy film can also
be considered a "flop" (it cost about $55M to produce).
Next week is the biggest week of the summer as two
of the biggest flicks of the year are released on Wednesday
including ICE
AGE 3 and PUBLIC
ENEMIES starring Johnny Depp and Christian Bale. What movie do
you think will be #1 next weekend? VOTE
HERE!!!
| 1.
Transformers 2 |
$
112 Million |
$201.2
Million |
| 2.
The Proposal |
$
18.5 Million |
$
69.1 Million |
| 3.
The Hangover |
$
17.2 Million |
$
183.2 Million |
| 4.
Up |
$
13 Million |
$
250.2 Million |
| 5.
My Sister's Keeper |
$
12 Million |
NEW |
| 6.
Year One |
$
5.8 Million |
$
32.3 Million |
| 7.
The Taking of... |
$
5.4 Million |
$
53.4 Million |
| 8.
Star Trek |
$
3.6 Million |
$
246.2 Million |
| 9.
Night at the... |
$
3.5 Million |
$
163.2 Million |
| 10.
Away We Go |
$
1.7 Million |
$
4.1 Million |
ACCESS
BOX-OFFICE ARCHIVES HERE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Viewing
1-10 of 43 User Comments
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
|
 |
Grand_Marquis
on Jun 29 2009, 2:55:32 PM writes:
I just wish The Dark Knight could've had more of an effect on the general public's baseline quality standards for action movies. Clearly, the bar remains unmoved. |
| Profile | Buddy |
|
Brer B8a
on Jun 29 2009, 10:23:26 AM writes:
Well what else was expected? Bay made a movie that appealed to everyone just like the Dark Knight. It made a shit load of money. It was just an average film to me I'm not going to bash it or say it was awesome but I'm just glad it didn't beat out TDK. This one will probably bank next weekend as well, I hope it doesn't beat out Public Enemies though. |
| Profile | Buddy |
|
darqjade
on Jun 29 2009, 9:08:55 AM writes:
It's a movie about giant robots! What the hell was everyone expecting?! Even though it was very heavy on the 'cheese' Transformers 2 was exactly what i would expect from a Michael Bay movie, so I wasn't dissapointed. (maybe because i don't know much about the orignial series to begin with). |
| Profile | E-mail | WWW | Buddy |
|
xxxoverridexxx
on Jun 29 2009, 8:54:25 AM writes:
lol to all you people talking about how this movie making $201 mil is taking away the intelligence from the film industry.
First off...WHAT INTELLIGENT FILMS MAKE INSANE MONEY AT THE BOX OFFICE?
These are the films that drive the industry. Without them, it would fail.
IN ORDER TO MAKE YOUR INTELLIGENT FILMS THAT YOU CONTINUE TALING ABOUT, YOU HAVE TO HAVE TRANSFORMERS, SPIDERMANS, XMENS, RUSH HOURS WOLVERINES, ANGEL & DAVINCI & DEMONS, TERMINATORS..
QUIT FUCKING COMPLAINING
This movie was great for what it was for. Long yes. But def fun.
At my theater, not 1 person I have spoken to has disliked the movie. Many say its better then the first.
To all you bitches, go watch Sisters Keeper. 10 mil at the box office will sure get you about 3 intelligent films |
| Profile | Buddy |
|
Princess Kate
on Jun 29 2009, 7:51:47 AM writes:
NOT QUITE THE "BIG DUMB" ACTION MOVIE...
...it is being derided for.
SPOILERS AHEAD!!!!
PERSONAL NOTE: Not that most people are really concerned about "plot points", especially with the way dialogue is playing out in here, but you have been warned, here goes:
Gioface has quite excellently broken down the relevance of "premise" when it comes to justifying movie-watching preferences.
The most recognizable aspect to this "movie" (God forbid someone mistake this "flick" with the classification of "film" or "cinema", since so many people would be up in arms) is the fact that there are "Big F-in Robots" beating each other into a pulp.
This movie, is essentially a male fantasy testosterone driven joyride. Obviously...
But it operates within it's own internal logic.
Is it Hard Science Fiction? Hardly
But let's explore some of the film's logic:
Does Jetfire's "teleportation" make sense?
Sure it does. Why?
How far is Cybertron?
Is it within the innerplanets?
Outerplanets?
Within the Milky Way Galaxy?
Andromeda Galaxy?
Farther?
Jetfire's "propulsion" system, when in Jet form may resemble modern day "aviation" standards, but what about space travel?
You'd need a considerable increse in "propulsion" to reach a "velocity" high enough to escape Earth's gravity.
So, it would make sense that an "organism"/"entity" would be using technology beyond low-level Jet Propulsion to compensate for long distance travel, something that re-classifies our current ununderstanding of Space-Time and Faster Than Light.
Are the Transformers really "Robots"?
The depiction of the Transformers classifies them as beyond the conventional definitions of "Metal-based, limited intelligence Robotics". The film depicts them as more of a Hybrid, something semi-organic, assuming bi-pedal to quadri-pedal to various forms of locomotion, but it could be entirely possible that they use other forms of fuel source besides Energons and why wouldn't they have a method of cleansing their system, something resembling organic biological systems like our own digestive tract.
They could very well have biological functions like farting, burping, etc.
They are not "Robots" in the conventional sense.
The list goes on... that's why this debate/thought experiment would never end if it reached full-swing.
Extra-terrestrial musings will always be endlessly fascinating but again, this franchise is not Gundam, Ghost in the Shell, or Neon Genesis Evangelion, if the deriders are as "intelligent" as they claim, they would know how to discern the difference.
Instead of criticizing the film's faults based on half conceived biases, why not use "intelligence" to reconceive your own prejudices and re-examine your own limited perceptions?
The universe is self-correcting, the mis-informed have to start their own questioning somewhere, but very little positive outcomes come out of pure Emotions alone, with no logic to back up limited viewpoints.
|
| Profile | E-mail | Buddy |
|
tHe sWiTcHeR
on Jun 29 2009, 4:48:19 AM writes:
MAINLY A QUESTION TO THOSE THAT DIDNT LIKE THIS FILM
My mind feels quite.... how should i say... squandered, when hearing all these negative comments about TF2 referring to not liking it because a lack of storyline.
Don't get me wrong, even though I liked this film, I don't rate it as one of the best films I've ever seen, but I'm starting to feel a sudden wave of hypocricy.... look at it like this...
We complain if hollywood do remakes or unneccesary sequals/prequals.
We complain if they keep trying un-original storys or ideas and don't try new things.
Yet, even though it's great to have a good story, take Taken, TDK or many of the films we've seen over the past year, if THIS film happens to not have such a great one, what' the big deal. Rather than trying to go for the major action AND major story (most action flicks ARE trying this lately), it's been kept old school, like the old Jackie Chan films (fuck me, the plots were terrible, but I'd sit through anything to see Jackie fight in Wheels on Meals, Police Story or Armour of God).
What I'm getting at, is "SO WHAT"... if the movie decided to go for the lack of storyline, toilet humour (which I actually find quite funny myself, but my humour isn't limited, I find a vast amount of comedys funny, where as some people only like a certain kind), all of which was in compensation for the fact that what MOST of us want to see is the robots!... HELL, if we KNOW that's what it's gonna be like, if BAY is in charge, why not just let ourselves like it for what it is, rather than what it might have been under a different director... I mean, Ican't see the action being anywhere near as hardcore under a different director.
So, to all those people that went in expecting another TDK.... You must of KNOWN from Transformers 1 that you weren't gonna get it, so why did you go in with expectations of a higher standard than you should have?
Oh, and to all the people saying "well, if this is what movie-goes want, then hollywood is gonna suck for the next few years"
Well, this isn't what I want, and I assume for many others, very often. Just a one off film like this, where we not only KNOW to expect it from Bay, but where we get to see these giant robots fight and Megan fox lookin sexy..... wat's so wrong with that. If ALL films had series storylines or concentrated on the storyline indefinately, then that would become boring, it's nice to have a variety, and a film which doesnt have it, I enjoyed just bein able to chill and watch Shia scream and just watch megan fox be megan fox and then wait for robots to fight.
The thing is, I can understand why people may not have liked it from there points, but i dont think ive seen one person who didnt like it, turn around and just say, it wasnt my cup of tea but i can see why others would like it.
switch out |
| Profile | Buddy |
|
Dekard77
on Jun 29 2009, 3:15:55 AM writes:
I LOVE U MR BAY
I am glad the movie did well. I hated it the first viewing, nearly fell asleep but then when I watched it for the second time it seemed like a lot of fun. The story was really non existent but the action made up for most of the faults and no one can handle the action in seamless form like Bay.
One great big ripe against the movie is the stupid annoying White House guy and not using the military angle with more a positive look. The first film worked better when the robots and the army was working side by side. |
| Profile | E-mail | Buddy |
|
sarcastos
on Jun 29 2009, 3:06:29 AM writes:
"Its just great to see a movie have a big opening even with the bad reviews. Its like a big "Fuck You" to the critics."
No, it's like a big "Fuck You" to what was once intelligence. the film going audience is only proving what i've been saying for years. retardation is contagious. |
| Profile | Buddy |
|
Dark Knight
on Jun 29 2009, 2:31:08 AM writes:
SO ...
... I guess Transformers - Search For Devastator's Balls is a sure thing now ... |
| Profile | E-mail | Buddy |
|
Princess Kate
on Jun 29 2009, 1:40:43 AM writes:
TRANSFORMERS: ROTF - A TRANSCENDENT SPIRITUAL EXPERIENCE
Guys,
I just read the best review EVER!
Ironically, it was a humorous, sarcastic review (or was it?... hmm) of "Transformers (2): RotF (Rise of the Fallen)", in the guise of a serious cinematic film criticism elevating Michael Bay's "summer movie" into the penultimate holy grail of film/cinema; a transcendental sensory experience overshadowing floundering attempts from the surrealists and expressionists, citing masters of the Art House and the Avant Garde.
The thesis of the review?
How flawed our needs are as filmgoers to demand plot, and how Michael Bay has presented for us the most convincing argument... NAY! He has introduced a path towards unraveling the fabric of reality itself, through the psychedelic sensory overload that is "Transformers: RotF". Which invites one thing from us... the viewers... perhaps even, as spiritual sojourners:
The film asks us to remove our "adult diapers" and step through the "illusion of reality" through this more-than-a-film... "Transformers: RotF" my friends is that gateway.
What a brilliant piece of cinematic film criticism :)
It comes from io9, and as my inner film critic began to awaken, I began to realize the parallels between this film and earlier Japanese paintings where artists successfully illustrated imagery WITHOUT Horizon Lines, where style took precedence over the stringent logistics of realism, very present in different eras like the much revered "renaissance".
This criticism challenges the willing, to view Bay as more than a "Summer Blockbuster" hack, but a visionary capable of a transcendental experience, that is truly "more than meets the eye" or any other senses.
Be challenged then, and watch it for how it transcends meaning, not how it falls impotently as slaves, like so many other plot-dependent films lay ashamedly limp in comparison under.
|
| Profile | E-mail | Buddy |
|
|
Viewing 1-10 of 43 User Comments
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
