If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Deadline)   Identity Thief absconds with the weekend box office, netting $36 million--a bigger opening than Bridesmaids--while Warm Bodies shuffled to #2 and Side Effects was a flat #3   (deadline.com) divider line 25
    More: Followup, Warm Bodies, bridesmaids, human beings, box offices, crime fiction, Melissa McCarthy, Steven Soderbergh, Catherine Hardwicke  
•       •       •

688 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 10 Feb 2013 at 12:57 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



25 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-02-10 08:36:09 AM
A big fat tractor-sized hippo of an opening, then?
 
2013-02-10 11:17:57 AM
Oh, a new Bateman movie. Let me guess, he plays a wild and carefree middle aged man living life for the fullest.

Oh, no, an uptight suit with no real emotion. That is going to be a stretch.
 
2013-02-10 11:41:37 AM

Teknowaffle: Oh, a new Bateman movie. Let me guess, he plays a wild and carefree middle aged man living life for the fullest.

Oh, no, an uptight suit with no real emotion. That is going to be a stretch.


He may have to go even farther outside his comfort zone and do a few 'slow burns' ala a poor man's Jack Benny...
 
2013-02-10 01:12:18 PM
Meh, Identity Thief looked pretty grating, so I went and saw Django Unchained instead.
 
2013-02-10 01:13:59 PM
People will literally watch anything. Except movies like Side Effects which I am told is an intelligent film.
 
2013-02-10 01:15:50 PM

PhiloeBedoe: Teknowaffle: Oh, a new Bateman movie. Let me guess, he plays a wild and carefree middle aged man living life for the fullest.

Oh, no, an uptight suit with no real emotion. That is going to be a stretch.

He may have to go even farther outside his comfort zone and do a few 'slow burns' ala a poor man's Jack Benny...


Who's Jack Benny?

j/k ... almost 40 years without Mr. 39 Forever.  He's missed more than we think.  I hope.
 
2013-02-10 01:26:45 PM

Mugato: People will literally watch anything. Except movies like Side Effects which I am told is an intelligent film.


So you didn't see it either?

I hadn't even heard of Side Effects until a couple days ago, while you can't avoid the ads for Identity Theft.
 
2013-02-10 01:30:16 PM
Well, I guess we owe Jason Bateman an apology.
 
2013-02-10 01:31:32 PM

Lumbar Puncture: Mugato: People will literally watch anything. Except movies like Side Effects which I am told is an intelligent film.

So you didn't see it either?

I hadn't even heard of Side Effects until a couple days ago, while you can't avoid the ads for Identity Theft.


No, I haven't seen either. But I did see the trailer for Identity Thief and either the movie is a piece of shiat or whoever cut the trailer needs to be fired. I've heard a lot of good things about Side Effects. Maybe it sucks, I don't know. But it looks a little more ambitious than a movie Adam Sandler could very well have produced.
 
2013-02-10 01:36:05 PM

Teknowaffle: Oh, a new Bateman movie. Let me guess, he plays a wild and carefree middle aged man living life for the fullest.

Oh, no, an uptight suit with no real emotion. That is going to be a stretch.


He seriously needs to fire his agent. He's hilarious, but he keeps doing these stupid movies.
 
2013-02-10 01:37:22 PM

Mugato: People will literally watch anything. Except movies like Side Effects which I am told is an intelligent film.


Side Effects looks like a great movie, but for me it just isn't something I need to spend $24 taking my wife and myself to see while it is in theater. Just like Contagion, it is something that I can wait to watch as a rental or on HBO on my 55" HDTV. With ticket prices being what they are now, a movie basically has to be something really special to get me out of my house.
 
2013-02-10 01:43:20 PM
From TFA: "Well, Winter Storm Nemo raged over the Northeast Friday but box office stayed really solid."

Also from TFA: "True, this weekend's total moviegoing is only $100M which is down a disappointing 45% from last year. "
 
2013-02-10 01:44:11 PM

Mad_Radhu: Side Effects looks like a great movie, but for me it just isn't something I need to spend $24 taking my wife and myself to see while it is in theater. Just like Contagion, it is something that I can wait to watch as a rental or on HBO on my 55" HDTV. With ticket prices being what they are now, a movie basically has to be something really special to get me out of my house.


Everyone says that movie prices are so much higher now. Maybe in New York or LA it's more but in most places it's $8.00. I don't see that as being a whole lot more than it was back in the day.
 
2013-02-10 01:59:24 PM

good_2_go: From TFA: "Well, Winter Storm Nemo raged over the Northeast Friday but box office stayed really solid."

Also from TFA: "True, this weekend's total moviegoing is only $100M which is down a disappointing 45% from last year. "


You didn't get past those two sentences did you?  The point was the new releases did surprisingly well despite low expectations and the snowstorm.

And looking at the stats, this weekend last year had FOUR new wide release movies including Phantom Menace 3D and a family movie (Journey 2), this year only had TWO new wide releases both rated R, so I think only a dummy would have expected something different than a big year to year loss.
 
2013-02-10 02:11:15 PM
I had thought about going to see Top Gun 3D, but I stayed in instead.
 
2013-02-10 02:26:29 PM
I wanted to see "Side Effects" because the movie has som kind of M. Knight Shalamanadingdong twist that movie reviewers keep talking about but won't reveal. Too bad I was snowed in all weekend. Will see it next weekend.

Plus I'm in love with Rooney Mara.
 
2013-02-10 03:40:52 PM
I'm interested in Side Effects because Steven Soderbergh is the man (his past direction of Julia Roberts efforts notwithstanding).
 
2013-02-10 04:14:21 PM

Mugato: Mad_Radhu: Side Effects looks like a great movie, but for me it just isn't something I need to spend $24 taking my wife and myself to see while it is in theater. Just like Contagion, it is something that I can wait to watch as a rental or on HBO on my 55" HDTV. With ticket prices being what they are now, a movie basically has to be something really special to get me out of my house.

Everyone says that movie prices are so much higher now. Maybe in New York or LA it's more but in most places it's $8.00. I don't see that as being a whole lot more than it was back in the day.


The issue is more the perceived cost instead of actual cost. Adjusted for inflation, yeah prices are probably flat. The difference is that 20 years ago your only alternative was watching a pan and scan videotape on a 20" SDTV a year later, so the theatrical movie was more valuable. These days, you can just wait a few months and then watch the movie on a 40" plus screen with surround sound at close to 2k resolution for the cost of a $25 Blu-ray disc, so the theater just doesn't have the same draw.
 
2013-02-10 04:14:38 PM

Mugato: Lumbar Puncture: Mugato: People will literally watch anything. Except movies like Side Effects which I am told is an intelligent film.

So you didn't see it either?

I hadn't even heard of Side Effects until a couple days ago, while you can't avoid the ads for Identity Theft.

No, I haven't seen either. But I did see the trailer for Identity Thief and either the movie is a piece of shiat or whoever cut the trailer needs to be fired. I've heard a lot of good things about Side Effects. Maybe it sucks, I don't know. But it looks a little more ambitious than a movie Adam Sandler could very well have produced.


I'm with you on that, the movie looks terrible from the trailers and commercials.  I was just saying there was a hell of a lot more marketing of one than the other.  You go fishing with dynamite and you'll catch something.  The one commercial I saw for Side Effects didn't really tell me anything about the movie to be interested in it (seems like trailers now either don't say what the movie is about or completely gives everything away).  It can be the best movie of all time but it's still going to lose to something with a better marketing budget.

I'm not going to see either in the theater, but I might rent Side Effects.
 
2013-02-10 04:54:54 PM

YodaBlues: Teknowaffle: Oh, a new Bateman movie. Let me guess, he plays a wild and carefree middle aged man living life for the fullest.

Oh, no, an uptight suit with no real emotion. That is going to be a stretch.

He seriously needs to fire his agent. He's hilarious, but he keeps doing these stupid movies.


His bank account says differently...He's not trying to get awards, he does movies he thinks are fun and profit him. Sorry he doesn't make movies to appease you.
 
2013-02-10 05:05:32 PM
I saw Side Effects. I'll see anything Soderbergh does. Like most of his recent films it does not have the big over the top dramatic moment but is a wll stitched together story with a nice cathartic ending. He really is the master craftsman in this film. You could follow the plot just in how he shifts the color palette. I don't think you need to see it on the big screen to appreciate it, but I'd see it in theaters anyway since this is Soderbergh's big screen swan song.
 
2013-02-10 06:03:37 PM

The1andonlyZack: YodaBlues: Teknowaffle: Oh, a new Bateman movie. Let me guess, he plays a wild and carefree middle aged man living life for the fullest.

Oh, no, an uptight suit with no real emotion. That is going to be a stretch.

He seriously needs to fire his agent. He's hilarious, but he keeps doing these stupid movies.

His bank account says differently...He's not trying to get awards, he does movies he thinks are fun and profit him. Sorry he doesn't make movies to appease you.


I'm glad he's successful,  like I said, I love Jason Bateman.  But you can be successful and not make horrible farking movies at the same time you know. Those two things aren't mutually exclusive.
 
2013-02-11 12:00:41 AM

Mad_Radhu: Mugato: Mad_Radhu: Side Effects looks like a great movie, but for me it just isn't something I need to spend $24 taking my wife and myself to see while it is in theater. Just like Contagion, it is something that I can wait to watch as a rental or on HBO on my 55" HDTV. With ticket prices being what they are now, a movie basically has to be something really special to get me out of my house.

Everyone says that movie prices are so much higher now. Maybe in New York or LA it's more but in most places it's $8.00. I don't see that as being a whole lot more than it was back in the day.

The issue is more the perceived cost instead of actual cost. Adjusted for inflation, yeah prices are probably flat. The difference is that 20 years ago your only alternative was watching a pan and scan videotape on a 20" SDTV a year later, so the theatrical movie was more valuable. These days, you can just wait a few months and then watch the movie on a 40" plus screen with surround sound at close to 2k resolution for the cost of a $25 Blu-ray disc, so the theater just doesn't have the same draw.


THIS THIS THIS THIS

And also, CAM Screens are almost DVD quality these days...
 
2013-02-11 05:49:08 AM

Mugato: Mad_Radhu: Side Effects looks like a great movie, but for me it just isn't something I need to spend $24 taking my wife and myself to see while it is in theater. Just like Contagion, it is something that I can wait to watch as a rental or on HBO on my 55" HDTV. With ticket prices being what they are now, a movie basically has to be something really special to get me out of my house.

Everyone says that movie prices are so much higher now. Maybe in New York or LA it's more but in most places it's $8.00. I don't see that as being a whole lot more than it was back in the day.


You can catch a matinee screening at the nearest theater to my house for around six bucks. And it's a damn nice theater too. They still screw you to death at the concession stand, but that's why I always smuggle in a candy bar and a bottled soda. I love theater popcorn though, so I do spring for it on occasion. The most I've ever spent on a movie ticket was like $15 at an IMAX in Chicago.
 
2013-02-11 08:30:18 AM
Side Effects is excellect, but the less you know about the movie, the better. I didn't know anything about it going in, except it's supposed to be Soderbergh's last film, and I'm glad I saw it that way.
 
Displayed 25 of 25 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report