"Next week is all counterprogramming, with the only wide debuts being the R-rated Sex and the City and The Strangers. Expect Indy to hold on to the crown." - me, last Monday

Yeah, good work, Nostradamus. "Counterprogramming" -- can you believe this idiot? Who let him on here, anyway? Far from headlining mere counterprogramming, Carrie Bradshaw delivered a swift kick to Indiana Jones' man-crotch, winning the weekend with $55.7 million to Indy's $46. Sex and the City's bow is the 5th all-time best opening weekend for an R-rated film. I -- and, in my defense, many others -- obviously underestimated the size of the "niche" audience eager to watch the big-screen finale of the far-too-popular HBO show. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, meanwhile, fell a hefty but hardly uncommon 55% from its first weekend, and it looks likely to eventually overtake Iron Man. That film, in turn, continues to have remarkable legs, dropping only 32% and bringing its cume to $276.6 million. And, since I caught flak for not mentioning it last week, I'll say that What Happens in Vegas is also holding very well, despite sucking.

Rogue Pictures will be very pleased with the debut of The Strangers, a low-budget, R-rated horror film. $20.7 million is a very good number, matching that of the PG-13 Prom Night 8 weeks back. And a #3 turn in last weekend's marketplace is nothing to be ashamed of. Horror films tend to plummet pretty quickly after the first weekend, but word-of-mouth on this one might actually be okay; we'll see. A bit further down the chart, Tarsem's cult-ready The Fall performed unspectacularly in its first weekend of semi-wide release, taking in $361,000 on 108 screens.

Click through for the weekend's top 10, and a couple of very sheepish thoughts about next weekend.

Ever since the numbers were released yesterday, anyone and everyone (as well as anyone who is everyone) has been talking Speed Racer -- specifically, how a $120 million Hollywood blockbuster could open with only $20 million at the box office. You can blame Iron Man, you can blame the marketing, you can blame the blogs for trashing the film all year long, you can blame Christina Ricci's weird haircut, or you can blame that judge on Project Runway for saying, "You can never have too much color!" Fact is, it missed the mark.

But what could've helped Speed Racer make more money in its opening weekend? The running time has been mentioned a lot in the past 24 hours, but a running time doesn't exactly woo audiences into the theater. Is the film's marketing 100% to blame? Should the trailers have been cut differently? Should they have stressed that this was a film for kids? Should they have added a little viral action into the mix? Or what about overall? From the beginning, were the Wachowski Brothers the right folks for the job? Should they have gone the animated route instead -- or maybe the animated 3-D route? Should they have made this a film for older kids; slap on a PG-13 rating?

In your opinion, what could've helped Speed Racer -- both in its opening weekend and in its development as a feature film?

%Gallery-11436%

According to early estimates from Box Office Mojo, this summer's second big-budgeted extravaganza failed to pick up more than $20 million at the box office this weekend, with the poorly-reviewed comedy What Happens in Vegas finishing right behind in third. Of course, Iron Man took the top spot for a second week in a row with roughly $50 million, while Speed Racer -- which some projected to take home at least $30-40 million -- came in second with $20.2 million, as What Happens in Vegas slid into third with $20 million. Rounding out the top five were Made of Honor ($7.6 million) and Baby Mama ($5.7 million).

So what happened to Speed Racer? Part of the reason had to do with its targeted audience, which, supposedly, was kids, though kids weren't very familiar with the cartoon the film was based on. That, and the flick clocked in at over two hours -- a running time that's been mentioned a lot this weekend, as well as one that's way too long for a PG-rated kiddie adventure. That said, its PG-rating scared away those adults who grew up with the cartoon; people who, most likely, were looking for something a bit more skewed toward adults (especially when Iron Man came out the weekend before and kicked a whole lot of ass). Nevertheless, I'm pretty sure we can rule out that Speed Racer franchise at this point.

Coupla questions for ya: Why do you think Speed Racer failed to power across the finish line in spectacular fashion? Also, what happens to the Wachowski Brothers now? Will folks think twice before giving them $150 million and free reign?

Despite an intense marketing push, Will Ferrell's latest sports comedy just couldn't hold up to his previous two efforts. Semi-Pro did take the number one spot at the box office this weekend, but it did so with a measly $15 million. Compared to last year's Blades of Glory (opened with $33 million) and Talladega Nights (opened with $47 million), that $15 million doesn't look so great -- and it's certainly not the way New Line wanted to go out (even though they are, technically, going out on top).

So why didn't anyone go see this film? Granted, people did go see it (enough for $15 million), but it played in over 3,000 theaters. Did the R rating actually hurt the film? Keep in mind, both Blades and Talladega Nights were PG-13 -- so did a raunchy, foul-mouthed Ferrell keep audiences away? Or was it the supporting cast? Woody Harrelson and Andre Benjamin aren't Jon 'Napoleon Dynamite" Heder and Sacha "Borat" Baron Cohen. Did Ferrell need a little more juice around him in order to score bigger buckets? Maybe the whole '70s basketball thing wasn't so appealing? I guess the bigger question should be: Does this $15 million opening signal the beginning of the end of Ferrell's reign over the box office?

Why did you stay away from Semi-Pro, which I heard was actually pretty damn funny?

This may be the strongest batch of Oscar nominees in some time, but general audiences don't care, according to a recent look by the Associated Press. The five Best Picture nominees combined have grossed about $246 million to date, compared with $297 million last year and $245 in 2005. (Juno is the sole exception, which has grossed over $100 million on its $2.5 million budget.) In 2003, the winner, The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King alone grossed more than $300 million, making this year's batch of nominees look small and paltry.

To break it down further, about 51 million people went to see The Lord of the Rings, while about 7.3 million have seen No Country for Old Men and 2 million have seen There Will Be Blood. Other multiple nominees like Michael Clayton, Away from Her and The Assassination of Jess James by the Coward Robert Ford have likewise played to small, specialized audiences. Though these are tough films, it's inspiring that they have received such an enthusiastic response from the few that have seen them. One commentator compared them to gourmet food as opposed to fast food. It takes a little more time and patience, but the flavor is ultimately better. And if everyone appreciated the good stuff, then places like McDonalds and movies like Spider-Man 3 would be out of business.

The great cinematographer Roger Deakins, who is nominated twice for No Country for Old Men and Jesse James, said: "It's one of the best years because there's so many intelligent films that are provocative. They're actually about something as well as being entertaining. It really makes you feel part of a real cinema," he added. "There's brilliant, brilliant people out there."

The critics might not like it, and also can't agree on whether it's better or worse than its two predecessors, but Variety reports that Resident Evil: Extinction topped the box office this weekend, pulling in an estimated gross of $24 million (from 2,828 runs). While we won't know if the success will continue into next week, this sci-fi horror flick is a perfect example of the sequel syndrome. The first, and often cited as the best, Resident Evil raked in $17 million in 2002 (on its way to $40.1 million), and the second, Resident Evil: Apocalypse, collected $23 million (heading to $50.7 million) in its first weekend. The increase has slowed, but it's still there.

Number two, of course, was another zombie flick, Good Luck Chuck. Okay, so it isn't about the undead, but it might make you one, if a 3% fresh rating is to be believed. A rating at 60, 50, or even 40% can be open for discussion, but it's usually the Justin and Kelly variety of schlock if it drops below 10%. So, we've got already-made zombies in a post-apocalypse Vegas battling an abysmal comedy that might make people into zombies. Oh, and we should mention that moviegoers packed the theaters for Rob Zombie's Halloween. Yup, it's zombie's all around! The question is: can they last? Will viewers not only disagree with the critics again, but continue to visit the flicks in droves, or will this batch bow their heads and agree, leaving next week to be open for new fare as the zombies meet their maker, once again?

In a classic case of doc vs. doc, nature vs. nurture, environmental doc The 11th Hour battled video gaming doc The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters for top honors among limited engagement earners this past weekend -- and the environment won, according to Leonard Klady of Movie City News. Klady's estimates put The 11th Hour in first place with a per-screen average of $14,700 at four locations for an estimated total of $58,800 for distributor Warner Independent. Cinematical's Ryan Stewart felt it had little new information to offer but "overall, The 11th Hour does a serviceable job of preaching to the environmental choir." Rotten Tomatoes rates reviews as being 79% positive.

Trailing not far behind was The King of Kong (I really don't like that needless titular verbiage). Scott Weinberg saw it at SXSW and gave it high marks; I saw it a couple of weeks later at AFI Dallas and loved it. For my money -- or quarters, if you insist -- it's one of the best movies of the year because of its keen sense of humanity; the snappy pace and non-condescending sense of humor helps too. Of the 36 reviews accumulated so far at Rotten Tomatoes, only one has been negative, giving it a 97% positive rating. The King of Kong averaged $10,300 per screen at five theaters in New York, Los Angeles, Seattle and Austin; distributor Picturehouse will expand it to more cities in the coming weeks.

Nature doc Arctic Tale, which Paramount Vantage pitched to family audiences, lured very few paying customers. Klady estimated a per-screen average of just $830 during a weekend in which the picture was expanded to 227 theaters. Our own Jette Kernion was none too impressed, noting: "I think it would play just as well on a television, perhaps on DVD if your family didn't want to sit through 90 minutes of nature film all at once." That seems to be what most parents have decided to do -- wait for the DVD.

Were you captivated by Monkey Magic as a kid? The late '70s's Japanese television show (pictured), based on the Chinese novel Journey to the West, evidently cultivated a devoted overseas following. I never saw it, but I did find a couple of clips from its opening sequence on YouTube. (Both the Japanese original and English-language dub feature a catchy theme song by Godiego.) Because remakes are not just for movies, Fuji TV aired a new edition of the show early in 2006, and that was so popular it spawned a movie version which opened in Japan last weekend. The story in ScreenDaily declared that Monkey Magic was "the first local live-action success of Japan's summer box office season."

While surfing for more information on the movie, I found a blog post that raises a good question: What's the best way to report an entertainment news story in the face of a natural disaster? Japan was struck by a typhoon over the weekend and then an earthquake on Monday. ScreenDaily's Jason Gray chose not to mention the disasters in his story, while Variety's Mark Schilling acknowledged the fatal disasters and reported: "Despite the downpours and ground trembles, punters filed into theaters across the country" for the film. Thanks to Don Brown's fine blog, I read on Gray's informative blog that Schilling's article 'rubbed him the wrong way.' Schilling responded in the comments section, and the two had an informed disagreement about how to report box office news, which I found fascinating. We pay attention to box office around here; Cinematical reports regularly on box office stories and we've just started posting a weekly wrap-up of the Indie Weekend Box Office. Still, it's always good to take a step back and keep things in perspective.

[ Via ScreenDaily ]

Apparently the first trick they teach the students at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry is how to conjure up enough money to choke a hippogriff. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix set a new record for a Wednesday opening with $44 million, and taking in $139.7 million as of Sunday. Last week's other newcomer Captivity finished in 12th place, taking in a mere $1.4 million dollars. With Hostel Part 2 also experiencing lackluster box office numbers, might this indicate that the torture horror fad has ended? I suppose the real test of that will come when the fourth installment of the reliably successful Saw franchise hacks its way into theaters this October.

Once the smoke cleared, here's how the weekend looked:
1. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix $77.1 million
2. Transformers $37 million
3. Ratatouille $18 million
4. Live Free or Die Hard $11.2 million
5. License to Wed $7.3 million

This weekend's premieres look to be more reserved than previous weeks, with not a robot, super hero or wizard in sight.

Hairspray
What's It All About: An adaptation of the Broadway musical that was itself based on John Waters' 1988 film, Hairspray is about an overweight girl's obsession with a TV dance show. The impressive cast includes John Travolta, Queen Latifah, Michelle Pfeiffer, Christopher Walken and Amanda Bynes.
Why It Might Do Well: Rotten Tomatoes is giving this a 100% Fresh rating and I, like many Americans, have a morbid fascination with the idea of John Travolta playing an obese woman.
Why It Might Not Do Well: A musical is a tough sell these days.
Number of Theaters: 3,000
Prediction: $20 million

I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry
What's It All About: Adam Sandler and Kevin James star as a pair of straight firefighters who pretend to be gay so they can register as domestic partners which will allow James' character to name his children as beneficiaries on his life insurance. One can only assume there will be merry mix-ups.
Why It Might Do Well: Knocked Up has done amazingly well this summer, pulling in $138.2 million so far, so the time may be right for another quirky relationship comedy, and both stars have proven they know how to make people laugh. And lest we forget, we get to see Jessica Biel in her underwear.
Why It Might Not Do Well: A plot that sounds like a sitcom episode.
Number of Theaters: 3,200
Prediction: $28 million

My method of prediction this week involves casting bones. Unfortunately, the only bones I had available were some KFC leftovers and it's gotten a bit messy in here. Needless to say, the wife is not pleased, but I suspect the coming weekend will go something like this:
1 Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
2 I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry
3 Transformers
4 Hairspray
5 Ratatouille

Last Week's Prediction Ranking
1. Matt: 16
1. Anna07: 16
1. Bubba8193: 16
1. Ray: 16
2. The 13th: 13
2. Bradley Thom: 13
2. Chris: 13
2. Gregory Rubinstein: 13
3. NPC:12
4. Edgeoforever: 10

If you want to join in on our friendly box office prediction competition (and I hope you do), don't forget to post your prediction for the top five films in the comments section below. One point for every top five movie correctly named, two points for every correct placement, and one extra point for the top movie.

Michael Moore is not as popular a magician as Harry Potter, but he can still draw a crowd. Sicko made an estimated $2.6 million over the weekend, according to Variety, reflecting a downturn of just 26% from the previous weekend. In view of the expansion by distributor The Weinstein Co. to 756 screens, the relatively small percentage drop-off in box office indicates that word of mouth is good. So far, Sicko has earned $15.8 million, which puts it on pace to overtake Moore's earlier Bowling for Columbine and last year's Oscar-winning documentary An Inconvenient Truth.

My Best Friend, the latest from French director Patrice Leconte, had the highest per-screen average among indie releases, chalking up $15,508 each at three screens. Not far behind was Talk to Me, which had an average take of $11,841 from 33 screens in its opening weekend. Also in its first weekend of release on six screens, Interview made an estimated $41,620, while Rescue Dawn averaged more than $9,000 on 38 screens. Introducing the Dwights sank to $2,600 per screen. The weekend's financial stars include You Kill Me ($620,288; cumulative total $1.5 million), La Vie en Rose ($545,693; $6.9 million) and Once ($325,000; $5.0 million). All of these films -- except one -- have been covered at Cinematical, either with reviews or an interview, and I've linked to our coverage so you can have a look at what our critics had to say.

More on Sicko: Kim Voynar just posted her Film Clips column this morning, in which she puts the earnings of Sicko in broader perspective, among other things. As a further point for discussion, Variety notes that The Weinstein Co. avoids box office comparisons to Fahrenheit 9/11 -- and rightly so, as that film was a phenomenon not likely to be repeated -- but then adds its own opinion that Fahrenheit had a topic "much broader in appeal." Is that true for you? Did you see Fahrenheit 9/11 but decide to skip Sicko because its topic isn't as appealing?

Once again this past week gave us another movie that broke another record (biggest opening during a non-holiday week). Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix took in $140 million since Wednesday ($77.4 million over the weekend alone), adding a whopping $190 million in 44 other countries around the world. Obviously, this kid is popular. I don't know many people who haven't at least read one of the six Potter books or watched one of the five films; my best friend (who happens to be one of those people) recently told me that he was staying away from the series until it's completed. "If I read one, I'm going to want to know that the entire series is available in both formats," he said. So, until Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows hits theaters, my friend wants nothing to do with the kid.

But he's not alone. Now it's time for my confession: I also happen to be one of those people -- except, I have no urge to read and/or see anything that has to do with Harry Potter. I haven't picked up a book, nor have I watched any of the films. Somehow I've managed to write a number of Potter-related posts over the years, but usually I spend about a half hour on Wikipedia, while also running questions past those Potter freaks on the Cinematical staff. Like with comic-related stuff, you get one fact wrong -- one misspelled name -- and the fanatics will attack. And they will attack hard. Here's the thing though -- no one has ever convinced me to read or watch. The people that love Harry simply tell me "I have to read!" or "It's so awesome!" -- but that's about as far as they go. I mean, what's so great about this kid? I don't see it. When it came time to decide whether I would watch Lord of the Rings, my friend sat down and explained the world, the backstory and the characters; essentially, he sold me on the series. I subsequently watched all three films and loved them. No one has done that for me with Potter. At least, not yet.

So, I ask you: Here's a chance for you fans to sell us non-fans -- What's so great about Harry Potter?

When debates arise about just how good the current sea of movies and blockbusters are, money matters always come into play. "Such-and-such film made a bajillion dollars at the box office, and fifteen trillion people went to see it, so it has to be good!" The other aspect that sometimes steps up to the plate -- how do each of these movies pan out if pitted against each other, taking inflation into account? Box Office Mojo has a list of Domestic Grosses, adjusted for the inflation of ticket prices over the years, and it includes a few of this years big movies -- Spider-Man 3 and Shrek the Third (highlighted in yellow). You know what? They're nowhere near the top.

The site adjusted ticket prices for all movies to be the estimated 2007 average of $6.58, and then whipped up a list of the top 100 grossing films, listing titles, studio, adjusted gross, unadjusted gross and the year of release. From this year's two that I mentioned above -- Spidey is ranked number 87, and Shrek is 94. What's up at the top? Gone with the Wind, of course. The film's unadjusted gross was $198,676,459, but with the inflation adjustment it's a whopping $1,329,453,600. Yes, that's over a billion bucks. The rest of the top five -- Star Wars, The Sound of Music, E.T. and The Ten Commandments. Sure, there's more to consider in this argument, but it's pretty interesting to see how gross numbers play out when ticket prices are the same. Thoughts?

Over on Deadline Hollywood Daily, Nikki Finke has a piece up about the anticipated weekend box office for Transformers that pretty much sums up why Hollywood's summer blockbusters (with some exceptions scattered here and there) tend to be so darn bad: because no matter how bad they are, and no matter how many critics write scathing reviews warning people how bad they are, audiences still flock to see them.

Transformers is a case in point: Finke notes that pretty much everyone on the planet expects the film to gross $125 million this weekend -- now stop a moment and ponder how many butts you have to put in seats to gross $125 million -- except for Paramount, which, according to Finke has back-pedaled to predicting a mere $100-125 million take.

That's a whole lot of moolah for a film about robots that disguise themselves as cars. To be fair, in spite of the fact that Cinematical's James Rocchi and Scott Weinberg thought the film was utterly wretched, it is sitting relatively pretty with a 60% fresh rating at Rotten Tomatoes (a surprising 69% from the Cream of the Crop), which isn't going to hurt the film's box office any, especially for those folks who are inclined to actually take a look at what critics are saying about a film before plunking down their cash for a $10 movie ticket and some snacks.

Steve Carell's Evan Almighty outdid the opening weekend of his last starring vehicle The 40 Year Old Virgin by about $11 million, placing Evan in last weekend's number one spot. As many have pointed out to me, I was overly optimistic about 1408, but the Stephen King adaptation starring John Cusack still managed a respectable second place. Both of last week's big gun's pushed The Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer down to number three, with box office dollars dropping 65% from its opening weekend for the super hero epic. Sleeper hit Knocked Up continues to add theaters, with the film showing on 68 additional screens this week, with the comedy dropping two positions.

Last weekend's box office top five:
1. Evan Almighty: $32.1 million
2. 1408: $20.17 million
3. Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer: $20.15 million
4. Ocean's Thirteen: $11.3 million
5. Knocked Up: $10.6 million

This week has a couple of big hitters, one of which is a much anticipated action sequel and the other a new animated feature from the director of The Incredibles. Here's what we've got:

Live Free or Die Hard
What's It All About: Action film poster child John McLane (Bruce Willis) continues dying hard 12 years after the franchise's last installment. McLane is taking on a high-tech terrorist who is threatening to collapse the U.S. economy via some devilish computer shenanigans.
Why It Might Do Well: Since McLane's new sidekick is played by that guy from the Apple Computer ads (Justin Long), the film will, at the very least, get the Mac user vote. McLane and his insane stunts have been absent from theaters long enough that the flick will certainly inspire nostalgia, and this kind of all out action movie is tailor-made for the summer market. And, of course, there's Bruce.
Why It Might Not Do Well: 12 years is a long time between sequels.
Number of Theaters: 3,350
Prediction: $40 million

Ratatouille
What's It All About: A computer animated family comedy about a rat who dreams of becoming a chef, and who seeks to fulfill his destiny at one of Paris's finest restaurants.
Why It Might Do Well: Rat will tap much of the same market as Shrek the Third which has made over $308 million, and the Disney/Pixar duo has an impressive history. Based on the trailer I'd say they've got another winner.
Why It Might Not Do Well: Without the recognizability of a previously successful character like Shrek, audiences may be slow to warm up to our rat-faced hero.
Number of Theaters: 3,500
Prediction: $36 million

Evening
What's It All About: Based on a novel by Susan Minot, a dying woman tells her two adult daughters about the defining moments of her life and of her greatest love.
Why It Might Do Well: Like A Mighty Heart last week, Evening provides a meat and potatoes alternative to all the summer movie eye candy, and an impressive cast including Meryl Streep, Claire Danes, Vanessa Redgrave, and Glenn Close may attract some attention.
Why It Might Not Do Well: This one may be too heavy for summer crowds looking for more lightweight fare.
Number of Theaters: 900
Prediction: $4 million

My prediction from last week was less than stellar, so this time around I've cast aside my crystal ball and am pursuing a more scientific approach that involves the positions of the stars, barometric pressure, and a Magic 8-Ball. Here's how I see the weekend going:

1. Live Free or Die Hard
2. Ratatouille
3. Evan Almighty
4. Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer
5. 1408

Last Week's Prediction Rankings:
1. Bubba8193: 16
2. NPC: 12
2. Opp-Neg: 12
2. Anna07: 12
2. Ray: 12
2. Chris: 12
2. Gregory Rubinstein: 12
8. Mario: 11
9. Ethan Stanislawski: 10
10. Bradley Thom: 9
11. DW: 7
12. Matt: 4

To have your prediction counted in our weekly competition, don't forget to give us your top five list before 5:00 PM on Saturday. One point for every top five movie correctly named, two points for every correct placement, and one extra point for the top movie.

I'll tell you one thing -- don't ask Variety. Ever since Superman Returns failed to absolutely crush the box office (as some expected it would), talk of a follow-up has gone back and forth. At first, Variety claimed a sequel was not "a sure thing" considering the lukewarm box office for Superman Returns. But once rumors began to circulate suggesting a Justice League movie may replace any and all further Superman sequels, Variety was quick to shoot it down, claiming the "assertion would be on par with saying Sony or Paramount would put their respective Spider-Man and Indiana Jones properties into turnaround." Well talk about not being able to make up your mind, because now Variety is once again questioning the sequel -- except, they're just a few months late to the party.

In a recent article, which talks about how a Justice League script (penned by partners Kieran Mulroney and Michele Mulroney) has been handed in to Warner Bros., Variety asks: "Will a souped-up Justice League prove to be Kryptonite to Superman?" When we first visited this topic, the JLA movie wasn't much more than a rumor at the time; Warners was interested in it, and they were looking for writers. But now that a JLA script has been completed (with Warners now searching for directors) before Bryan Singer and Co. have had time to finish their Superman sequel script, does that mean there's a possibility we'll see JLA before (or in replace of) the further adventures of the Man of Steel? Right now, Singer's Superman sequel is slated to be released in 2009. However, there's currently no script and the dude is filming another film, Valkyrie, for United Artists in the meantime.

So, I ask you: With a script done, will Warners bypass a Superman sequel and attempt to snag Singer to direct a Justice League movie instead?

[via IGN]