Recent Blog Posts
-
SNL Strives to Keep Election Momentum
Nov 12 200812:00 am EDT -
The Dawn of a New Night Shyamalan
Oct 30 20082:48 pm EDT -
Icahn Double Feature: A Yahoo-Lions Gate Deal?
Oct 22 20086:00 pm EDT -
NBC Tries to Copy Fox Hero Worship
Oct 22 200812:00 am EDT -
Can W Succeed Even Though W Failed?
Oct 16 20087:02 am EDT -
Paul Newman's Tasty Legacy
Oct 01 20082:30 pm EDT -
Tough Times, Even in Tinseltown
Sep 24 20088:00 pm EDT -
New Life for a New Line Movie
Sep 19 200812:00 am EDT -
New to Hollywood? Watch Your Wallet.
Sep 11 200812:00 am EDT -
Superheroes Save Hollywood! (Barely.)
Sep 03 20081:15 pm EDT
Spider-Man 3: The Early Numbers
Sony's Spider-Man 3 is set to appear in 4,253 domestic theaters this Friday, Variety is reporting. That makes it the widest opening of all time (beating 2005's Shrek II's 4,163 locations). But will the picture live up to all the numerical hype? Kim Masters asks that very question today on Slate.com. Sony, which says the movie cost $270 million to make (Slate and others have claimed that it's closer to the $300 plus million mark) is banking on a big opening weekend. And they're going to need it because the comic-book adaptation will only have a couple of weeks before Pararmount/DreamWork's Shrek the Third and Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End hit theaters. Slate crunches some early numbers. The result? They predict that Spidey could underperform:
A distribution executive at a studio that has nothing to do with any of the films just mentioned predicts that Spider-Man will open huge, at about $120 million. The film is an event with a following, and there is nothing in theaters right now that anyone wants to see, according to this executive. But the question is the strength of the movie's eight legs. "Shrek and Pirates have broad, broad appeal," this executive says. "With Spider-Man, the word is out that it's dark." Taking into account the movie's cost, our veteran believes that could mean trouble. Other arguments may support that view: The second Shrek did massively better than the first ($920 million worldwide versus $484 million). The second Pirates also outdid the original, taking in more than $1 billion versus $654 million. But Spider-Man 2 grossed about $40 million less than the first installment, pulling in $783 million. Sony believes it left money on the table with Spider-Man 2 because the film didn't open until July. But that dubious logic created its own bind: The rush to meet the earlier date for Spider-Man 3 was a contributor to the film's staggering expense. And a former insider at the studio says the first Spider-Man got a big boost when it opened in May 2002 because Star Wars: Episode 2, which opened a couple of weeks later, was a bit weaker than anticipated. That left Peter Parker with an open field for longer than expected. This time, though, the executive expects Shrek and Pirates to be formidable. Let the games begin.
Counterpoint: DeadlineHollywoodDaily is reporting that the early international numbers for Spider-Man 3 are bigger than the first two installments.
Comments
If you are commenting using a Facebook account, your profile information may be displayed with your comment depending on your privacy settings. By leaving the 'Post to Facebook' box selected, your comment will be published to your Facebook profile in addition to the space below.





