Monday, 12 February 2001

WEEKEND REVIEW

Normally, my first reaction to hyperbolic stories in which movies break new records on the basis of a razor thin estimated step above the former Number One or in this case, Number Three, is to be very tough. Yet in the case of Hannibal, which is being touted as the third biggest opening weekend ever, I think they are underselling. Because although Mission: Impossible 2, Star Wars: Episode One – The Phantom Menace and The Lost World: Jurassic Park 2 all had Friday-Saturday-Sunday box office runs of $57.9 million and more, all three of the films ahead of and just behind Hannibal opened on Memorial Day weekend, inflating the Monday number significantly. Also, none of the three competing films actually opened on Friday. All three opened earlier in the week, anticipating the massive weekend to come. And keep in mind, to make $58 million mark, all Hannibal needs, based on Friday and Saturday numbers, is a $15 million Sunday. That's very realistic.

So, I would say that Hannibal, baring the revelation of a gross overestimation, is the single biggest opening 3-day weekend ever. There are two or three films that have done more business over three days, but it feels like splitting hairs to me. This is clearly the biggest non-holiday opener ever. Strike up the hyperbole. In this case, it is deserved. (Which doesn't mean that I endorse the movie. More on that below.)

I'm a bit more sanguine about the estimate on Saving Silverman, which is likely off by at least $500,000. Nonetheless, it will remain in the Top Three. The Wedding Planner claimed a 26 percent drop, which also smells quite a bit. And Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon took it's first drop this weekend, off all of 25 percent, by estimate. Now, we all get to wait for Tuesday morning to see whether the film gets the deserved boast of an Oscar nomination – and 400 more screens with it – or whether we are looking at the near-end of a record breaking foreign language run.

The best news of the weekend box office came, however, from Warner Bros.' Valentine, with fell a glorious 56 percent.

THE GOOD: The deal for The Blair Witch Project was pretty simple. For every $2 million over $10 million that the film grossed, Artisan would give directors Eduardo Sanchez and Daniel Myrick $250,000 or 12.5 percent. The film grossed $242 million worldwide. I'll do the math for you. That's $29 million. And we haven't even gotten to video yet. But Artisan was apparently charging off, as they had a contractual right to, marketing costs. But Sanchez & Myrick accused the company of overcharging for marketing by as much as $80 million. Assuming that $40 million for worldwide marketing would be reasonable and that was charged off at $80 million because rentals are generally 50 percent, they were looking at payment on $72 million or $9 million. The settlement was $29 million, inclusive of video. $10 million in marketing charges that weren't really there and another $10 million for video? Could be.

THE BAD: Last week, Irish bar owner turned movie producer Jerome O'Connor and/or "his people" were pushing his story about how DreamWorks had done him wrong on his one film credit, An Everlasting Piece. You see, O'Connor is pressing the kind of case that only someone who never intends to produce again would ever press in this town. He's suing DreamWorks for releasing his film wrong.

O'Connor adds to his complaint, however, the bizarre notion that the S and K in what used to be known as DreamWorks SKG somehow conspired with the British to kill off this film. Why? So Spielberg could score a knighthood. WHAT?!?!?

Even more wacky is O'Connor's suggestion that Jeffrey Katzenberg told him directly to remove one potentially offending political scene or "'If you don't take it out, we'll kill the movie." Geez!

The funny thing is that DreamWorks did fail to sell this movie worth a darn. But they weren't hiding it. There were plenty of opportunities to see it. And the general consensus was the same one I reached… it wasn't very good. It was an interesting idea, but it never quite came together. DreamWorks didn't include the film in its Oscar package… but it didn't include The Road to El Dorado either. And, of course, there is the big weirdness here…. this is a Barry Levinson film. Katzenberg & Co. are not out to enrage Barry Levinson. But O'Connor claims Levinson won't talk because he is afraid of DreamWorks. I'll tell you what… they need to be solicitous of him more than he does of them. Directors on Levinson's level are more scarce than studios. But, I would like to know what he really thinks and the sooner he speaks publicly to this issue the better.

THE UGLY: I don't think I need to do a lot more here than to quote Hannibal producer and soon-to-be-Irving-Thalberg-Award-recipient Dino De Laurentiis.

He said, "I must confess I expected it to be big, but not this big. Hannibal is a picture in its own. It's a picture that will be remembered forever.''

Uh, no. Hannibal will never be an important, well-remembered film. Sorry.

But in the next breath, I should say that I do think that DeLaurentiis, one of history's great hackmeisters, deserves the Thalberg Award. Dino is what Hollywood is really all about… just as Warren Beatty represented the beautiful side of hustle last year, DeLaurentis is a representative of the uglier side of hustling… but not as dark as hustling has become. You will find a lot of people to tell you horrible Dino stories. But in the end, he made bug movies happen. That is a great and glorious thing. And he's been at it for 60 years. Vanja, Hoffman, Samaha, etc, etc, etc… eat your hearts out.

JUST WONDERING: Do you want to know whom I think will be nominated tomorrow morning? Well, I will be posting my guesses tomorrow night and on Tuesday morning, I'll run a follow-up. So make sure to check both out.

BAD AD WATCH: I want to clarify the Quoters List that I put up for the first time on Friday. The list is not a long list of people I consider quote whores. I will point out particularly egregious quoting transgressions as they happen. That includes the quotes themselves, which some of you have asked for. But the basic idea of the list is to let readers decide for themselves by looking at the gross numbers. Every new film that has quotes this year will become part of this list. And to explain the empty Roeper spot, I put him in when I started the list because R&E&The Movies is still the most important quote opportunity around. I started the list before looking at the papers and wrote down Ebert, Roeper and Travers as the most quoted. When the list filled in, I forgot to remove Roeper when there was no fresh quote to fill in the slot.

Anyway, done explaining. The list itself will become more interesting. Promise.

READER OF THE DAY: The Unknown Ticketeer: "I'm currently at the Toy Fair in Manhattan, making some good money and seeing how the toy industry sells itself. I'm at the Hasbro building on 23rd St., and out of the many impressive booths set up, the ones for future films intrigue me, like the Jurassic Park III exhibit, the Disney/Pixar Monsters, Inc. one, but most of all, the Planet of the Apes one. I was a BIIIIIG Ape-head when I was younger, and this film has me as excited as Phantom Menace and Lord of the Rings are for fans of those tales. So, I was thrilled to be one of the first on the "Planet" to see the promo piece with clips of the film interspersed with brief talking head moments with Tim Burton, Rick Baker, Dick Zanuck, and several of the actors. (Rick is supposed to be there on Monday and Tuesday.) Estella Warren (growwwwr) looks hot as the "new" Linda Harrison, and the ape makeup overall looks like it's molded closer to the actors mouths, so that it doesn't look as fake. I was there today when the booth presenter talked it up to the Toys R Us folks. They seemed impressed. Maybe it was the swag luggage tags that are covered in fake fur, with the quote on the back: "Get your paws off my luggage, you damn dirty ape!" And yes, the original logo is back. That's a good sign. What's not a good sign is that the large action figure of Mark Wahlberg looks like Don Adams in an astronaut suit. (Another guy I don't know said the exact same thing when he walked in on me and the booth presenter!)"

Big Ed writes: "Well, Ridley Scott has succeeded into turning Hannibal Lecter into Freddy Kruger. I wonder if Lecter can borrow that razor blade glove to attach to his stump for the future direct-to-video sequels. What a disappointment."

JP For YOU writes: "OK, so I keep reading and don't write often, but I do write occasionally when something piques me, and B. the Canadian's comments about "some fanboys' wish to view Cox's performance as superior to Hopkins" did it. First, in some ways, I'm surprised you printed it. From my reading, it basically says this: "To all you people who preferred Brian Cox over Anthony Hopkins as Lector: Hopkins was vastly superior to Cox; Cox couldn't touch Hopkins ability as an actor; Cox's portrayal was barely above garden-variety TV serial killer fare; and the real reason you didn't like Hopkins was that you're all a bunch of closet homophobes, insecure in your own sexuality." I realize that's all a bit pointed, but it's how I felt.

Now, I loved Manhunter from the first time I saw it (on VHS when it first was available; I didn't get a chance to see it in the theatre), and I thought Brian Cox did a fine job of Lector. I was, in fact, somewhat

disappointed that he wasn't in Silence (only because I hate it when sequels get made and old actors are dumped; hurts the continuity for me), but I was the only one I knew who ever even heard of Manhunter, let alone realized Silence was a sequel, so no one understand my annoyance (or cared, I'm sure). I thought both Hopkins and Cox both did a fine job of playing Lector, although in different veins (no pun intended), and honestly don't consider one particularly superior to the other. (Do I think Hopkins is probably a better actor than Cox overall? Yes, but I'm talking about the portrayals of one character here, not a body of work.) But, if I had preferred Cox to Hopkins, I would have been even more offended by the idea that it was because Hopkins "sexual ambiguity" somehow bothered me. Someone saying that another's opinion is wrong is fine (that's how we differ), but resorting to such immature baiting tactics to try and reason why is just plain offensive."

E ME: Happy Monday… are you going to happy after 5:55 a.m. PST tomorrow?