I'm not exactly sure what the studios had against this weekend, but none of them offered up any new wide releases. Well, OK, so MGM opened Awake starring a none-too-impressive Hayden Christensen, but by most accounts the movie wasn't worth seeing. So, once again, audiences were faced with a weekend with nothing new to watch.
Frankly, I found it to be kind of a relief. Filmmakers are coming close to breaking last year's record 600+ new movies. For those of you doing the math, that's nearly two new movies EVERY DAY. Who can keep up with that? Weekends have averaged between 3 and 4 new movies making it a painful effort just to keep up with the new stuff, much less try to weed out the crap and only see what's worth paying $10 to watch.
Awake, the lone ranger in new release, couldn't muster enough interest to beat last weekend's top three. Enchanted, This Christmas and Beowulf all remained first to third respectively, with Enchanted pulling ahead of Beowulf in total box office sales. The upside down fairy tale broke the $70 million mark while massive 3D CG animated is faltering off at only $68 million.
No Country For Old Men, which fell out of the top ten last weekend despite expanding to over 850 theaters, bounced back up to number eight. It's not so much a case of the movie doing better than it did last weekend (in fact it fell from $7.7 million to $4.5 million), but the fact that everything else at the bottom of the chart did even worse.
For the full list check out the chart below.
WEEKEND BOX OFFICE TOP TEN November 30 - December 2, 2007
LW = Last Week WR = Weeks Released THTRS = Number of Screens * Denotes new release. Click on title to read CB Review
Note: This website is not meant for use by minors. The views expressed in the comments section below are not our own. This section is intended for discussion of the topic in the post above. Disagreement is encouraged, however comments which attack, insult, or threaten the author in a personal manner won't be published. Similarly, comments that we deem to be poorly worded, or wildly off topic will also not be approved and may be mocked. For free, uncensored, unfettered, and possibly dangerous discussion visit our forum.
I read through quite a few articles starting Friday on Google. I read reviews from people who said it wasn't screened for critics and didn't sound like they saw it and still reviewed the movie.
The reviews from people who did see it weren't all bad, mixed at least, so I think it's unfair to say "by most accounts the movie wasn't worth seeing". I respected the reviews that, liked it or not, at least went to see it and gave honest criticism about this movie and these performances.
That's a pretty big accusation you're making against the critical community. Got any evidence to back it up, or is that just a wild supposition on your part GML?
I know Cinema Blend's Rafe Telsch saw it... he just didn't like it.
By most accounts, many critics (the ones I read) wrote reviews without having seen the movie since it wasn't screened for them. So they just summarized and made fun of the actors instead.
I didn't know what to expect when I went to see it but it turned out to be a good suspense thriller that had my attention from beginning to end. I hope people will go to see it. It didn't deserve the treatment it got by most critics.
This site is operated by Cinema Blend LLC. For advertising inquiries, contact Gorilla Nation. CinemaBlend.com is a private, independently owned website which is intended only as entertainment. The views expressed on this website may or may not reflect those of its owner. Don't take us too seriously.
December 3, 2007 at 14:15
December 3, 2007 at 14:14
December 2, 2007 at 22:29
December 2, 2007 at 22:28