W. Bombs at Box Office

  • Bookmark and Share

This is a story of hope and reality. First the hope from Bloomberg News 10 days ago with the very hopeful title of Oliver Stones' W May End Political Films' Drought:

``W.'' distributor Lions Gate Entertainment Corp. is betting the movie can break a box-office drought for political films. None of the five released in the weeks ahead of the Nov. 4 election has brought in more than half of the $55.3 million in sales generated by Walt Disney Co.'s ``Beverly Hills Chihuahua,'' the current box-office champ, since Oct. 3.

``A lot of eyes are on `W.,''' said Gitesh Pandya, editor of New York-based Box Office Guru LLC. ``There's certainly a lot of interest in it from the right and the left.'' The film ``has a shot at finding box-office success,'' he said.

The movie, which opens tomorrow, may take in about $34 million in its first four weeks in U.S. and Canadian theaters, according to Los Angeles-based Cantor Fitzgerald LP's HSX Research, which tracks film performance.

Controversial films help Lions Gate attract top talent, said Tom Ortenberg, who is responsible for movie-release strategy for the Santa Monica, California-based studio. ``Prestige pictures can be big moneymakers.''

 And now the "sad" reality as presented by Nikki Finke's Deadline Hollywood Daily:

There's been tremendous interest by the public in the box office fate of Oliver Stone's W. for its second weekend in release. Well, it ran out of steam. QED International/Lionsgate's Bush biopic sank 58% to No. 7 with a $5.3M weekend from 2,050 dates and new cume of $18.7M. The $30M negative cost film should end up with $23M domestic box office gross by the end of its North American run. That means, with a $25M P&A investment and Lionsgate's distribution fees, the film won't recoup.

In short, W. bombed bigtime. Perhaps the investors (suckers) in this flick should have paid attention to James Murray of NewBusters who accurately predicted the fate of this bomb way back in March:

These people never learn. Other than some diehard BDS sufferers, who in their right mind is going to pay to see an Oliver Stone depiction of George W. Bush? Fair or not, the president suffers from low poll numbers and we've heard for some time that America suffers from Bush fatigue, so it's curious why any studio would greenlight such a project and begin filming while he's still in office.

Hollywood apparently has learned nothing with the seemingly endless string of antiwar flicks bombing, so now we'll get the moonbat look at Bush. One can only imagine how Dick Cheney, Donaly Rumsfeld and the nefarious cabal of neocons will be portrayed.

Bush has been the most scrutinized president in modern times thanks to the explosion of the blogosphere, so it's not as if Stone would be able to shed any new light on his life or presidency. You can be sure, however, he will be taking creative license.

No surprise that W. would bomb. Here is one of the reviews on IMDB from someone who wasted his money on this disaster:

Just got home from "W" , the Oliver Stone piece of *beep* film.

I kid you not, THIS FILM HAD ABSOLUTELY NO PLOT ! ! ! ! ZERO ! ! !

NOTHING ! ! ! ! 1

It has scenes about the Iraq war and talk about it, but thats it...

It has scenes about the relationship with his father and talk about it, but thats it....

It has scenes about his election and talk about it, but thats it!!!!

NOTHING !!!

THE MOVIE WAS THE BIGGEST WASTE OF TIME. I saw 4 people walk out of it ! ! ! I wish I didn't sit through it. It ended so stupid too. Bush has a baseball hit to him and he's ready to catch it, but doesn't.

I assume it's an art film about politics and Bush, but the movie did not play write. It looked slapped together at the last second...

Wow..Ok, I'm done ranting, but dont see this *beep* 

So it looks like the people who walk into the theaters to see W. are walking out later and asking themselves Y.

—P.J. Gladnick is a freelance writer and creator of the DUmmie FUnnies blog.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

From the Inbox

George Bush has been in office for 7 1/2 years.  The first six the economy was fine.

A little over a year and a half ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2-1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.
4) The DOW JONES hit a record high -- 14,000+
5) American's were buying new cars, taking cruises and vacations overseas, living large! But American's wanted 'CHANGE'!  So, in 2006
they voted in a Democratic Congress & yep -- we got 'CHANGE' all right!1) Consumer confidence has plummeted;
2) Gasoline is now over $3.75 a gallon & climbing;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) Americans have seen their home equity drop by   $12 trillion dollars & prices are still dropping;5) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.
6) THE DOW is probing another low -- $2.5 TRILLION DOLLARS HAS EVAPORATED FROM THEIR STOCKS, BONDS & MUTUAL 
FUNDS INVESTMENT PORTFOLIOS!YEP, IN 2006 AMERICA VOTED FOR CHANGE! AND WE GOT IT! A
DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS, NANCY PELOSI. HARRY REID.
Now the Democrats' candidate for president -- and the polls say he's gonna be 'the man' -- claims he's gonna really give us change! Just how much more 'change' do you think you can stand?

Have a very nice day.

Hmm...

2) Gasoline is now over $3.75 a gallon & climbing;

Copy-pasted perhaps?

Otherwise, I agree with everything you posted.

Foolican

Ha. Wonder how long that email took to get to my inbox?  The email I posted also had the dow probing a new low -- 11,300 (I had to take some editing license on that).  I let the outdated gas price slide. God only knows what tomorrow will bring until we get some hockey moms representing us that are bright enough to figure it best to go drill for our own.

Yeah, I also thought the point the email made was good.  I would just add the far left's ingratitude directed toward's Bush for keeping their urban playgrounds safe from terrorism for the last seven plus years is shameful.

Another Liberal Propaganda piece loses money

I wonder how much money Hollywood is prepared to lose on Liberal propaganda pieces like this.  It seems that every movie with a liberal message has lost money in the last four years.  Has anyone done a tally of the total money lost? I bet the total losses exceed 100 million. 

Like I said previously about the MSM, liberals seem to be content with riding their industry to destruction like Slim Pickens riding a bomb out of a B-52 at the end of Dr. Strangelove. 

Strangelove

Like I said previously about the MSM, liberals seem to be content with
riding their industry to destruction like Slim Pickens riding a bomb
out of a B-52 at the end of Dr. Strangelove
.

Now that was a great movie. Anything that makes fun of politics in general, and is not a spin machine for a political party, always does well in theater.

You have a point.  However,

You have a point.  However, I'm curious to see how these liberal propaganda pieces fared against the conservative ones.  Is W. doing better than An American Carol?

Comparing movies

It is difficult to compare the box office of one specific movie with another specific movie, since the differences may be due to many other things than political viewpoint.  It is much more instructive to compare movies of the same genre (Spiderman vs. Superman or American Carol vs. Religulous) and even better to compare the overall success of the dozens of liberal message movies versus the couple of movies that have been allowed to escape Hollywood with a conservative lean.

ROI should be an important factor along with total revenue.

Look below...

Übercon

"The voice of dissent must be heard."-Henry Ford

   Wow.... this really

   Wow.... this really puts me in a bind.  Now I have decide whether hollywood is made up of fools or idiots.

Hollywood does not care.

I don't even think hollywood cares if they lose money on this movie or not. It is a hit piece against the right and that is all that they care about. They want to damage the GOP a little at a time. Once the left is in power however, these movies will go away for a while unless the hollywood right gets a back bone and puts out a few movies of their own.

 

 

Hollywood does not care.

I don't even think hollywood cares if they lose money on this movie or not. It is a hit piece against the right and that is all that they care about. They want to damage the GOP a little at a time. Once the left is in power however, these movies will go away for a while unless the hollywood right gets a back bone and puts out a few movies of their own.

 

 

P.J.

First off THANKS for all the good work you do, i have become a fan of yours. What i'm askin now tho is off of this topic; I just caught part of 60 mim., they did a segment on "credit default swaps" and derivitives, which i do not understand. Anyway, they laid this finacial crisis we are in at the feet of the "credit default swaps" and claimed the bill which made it possible came in 2000 and was signed into law by Bill Clinton with his encouragement and blessings. Can you enlighten us on any of this, as it seems to indicate the "blame" for this crisis goes a lot further back than Bush and the last 8 years, and maybe Mc./Palin could get some mileage out of it. Thanks,

kilrod

p.s. I am also gonna copiy and paste this on a Noel Sheppard topic and ask him the same question, as i am also a fan of his 

Remember, only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American Soldier

troofer did not show

If Oliver made it a true inside job movie and the Bush himself pushed the button on WTC 7 ect. it might have done better (not really). It would have brought all the true troofers out of their mom's basement to the light of day. I think what happened is it tossed them a loop. For the troofers to be troofers they have to suspend their disbelief that Bush is not the sharpest tool in the shed and yet make him is smart enough to put the people in power to do something as big as 9-11 and also not mess it up. "W" went against this idea. It is hard to protest a movie about Bush (as they protest anything bush) when one want to support the director's left ideas. In the end they just stay home.

McCain / Palin  '08

Palin/Hasselbeck '12

IF...

To riff off the Abortion Bomber thread: Brian Williams should ask, "If W. bombed at the ticket office, is Oliver Stone a terrorist?"

"This is the age in which thin and theoretic minorities can cover
and conquer unconscious and untheoretic majorities."
-GKC, 1919

Insanitywood

Psychiatrists define insanity as: doing the same thing over and over hoping for a different result.

I have never heard a better description of Hollywood.

All you are doing...

when you pay good money to see this liberal trashing of George Bush is encouraging them to do it again and again and again.  I, for one, will not pay to see this money.  I finally watched Stone's "Platoon" for the first time last week and if you hate this country, you will definately love that movie.  Jim Webster

Anti-American?

If you hate certain policy of the government, does that mean you hate this country?  Did you hate this country before Bush got elected? Just askin'.

Gee Jefrro

I am still scratching my head over what Pres. Bush has really done to make you guys slavering drooling screaming lunatics. Like this is really a fascist country and Bush is Hitler delusions. Everyday I see Democrats being hustled off into the cattle cars to the Gulag, along with the breadlines and people living in cardboard boxes must be terrible to live here and have such an evil Pres. rubbing his hands and laughing maniacally and taking away your freedom.

Speaking of Stone has always been a leftie, I a Viet Vet, am disgusted at his "4 star" movie Platoon. I suggest you immigrate to Mozambique or Angola or another socialist utopia since you hate this country and everything it stands for. Sorry Jeffro lefties don't love this country they dont even like this country must be some kind elitist guilt thing  mental illness with you guys . It must be terrible living in this 3rd world shit hole of a country.

"...no civilization, no matter how rich, no matter how refined, can long survive once it loses the power to meet force with equal or superior force." - Bernard Knox

Follow The Money

This film was financed by a group of very nefarious people who have alleged criminal as well as Communist-related backgrounds.  One fiancier character in particular, Johnny Hon, has a close personal relationship to the Great Leader Kim Il Sung himself (http://www.johnnyhon.com/) and is closely tied to the communist party in the PRC.  On the surface when you read his background you will find some very interesting and high points but look deeper and you will find some relationships that are suspect. 

Hopefully, after we rid of Obama (knock on wood) we can finish up with the likes of Stone and Moore two rabid anti-Americans that have been around just a little too long.  Well, Stone is on his way out and hopefully with this failure more and more door in Hollywood will be closed to him. 

I think, but am not sure

I think, but am not sure that Johnny Hon isn't the financier but just a bagman for the real moneymen. Maybe somebody who has followed Hons career can dig to find out where the money for this dog came from?

W bombs Obama looses

The polls would have you believe that most Americans hate George W. Bush so much that they would drool and spit like David Letterman to do anything to get at him.

Yet unlike Mel Gibson's Passion film which was widely supported on a like subject, because Hollywood hates Christians.........W bombs.

Now the box office tallies reflect in a huge way Obama. He got lots of fanfare, but has faded fast.
Letterman did his worst to promote this crap just like he has done Obama and look what Obama has for over 600 million spent.

Twisted polls which always go 10 points for a Democrat with almost 12 percent of the electorate not saying who they will vote for.

So in real numbers John McCain in real voters is likely running at a 6 point lead over Obama. If he takes 8 points in the undecideds which can trend 10, then he will win this by 16 points.

This movie states a great deal more about Obama supporters as they insanely hate Bush 43. If the nation had these (let's face real numbers here in the polls say Obama should be gathering in his landslide almost 90 million voters.......that translates to box office of almost a billion dollars for W and yet the movie bombed.)

The support for W and Obama are the same lunatic fringe. W fading at the box office after a great deal of hype means Obama has limits on his support.

I will remind people again on Passion how that was supported. W didn't even generate the support for Stone's other wacko films.

The public doesn't hate George Bush. Remember the marches never occurred against him. There is no passion. You didn't see Denver or Colorado shutting down when Obama was at the convention. Numbers the polls state should mean the city should have been clogged. It wasn't.

I look forward to Wednesday in November in these signs to prove out as real factors that are more accurate than the polls. No one has ever gaged box office and it would be interesting to note that.

 

agtG

 

*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS

Have you seen the numbers

at Obama gatherings? I guess you can draw quite a crowd with free concerts.

I just got back from seeing

I just got back from seeing Fireproof, what a movie and with a message.  W cannot compete against good movies.  Fireproof was also made on the cheap and made money.  These people are spreading the good news.

Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.

The producers of W don't

The producers of W don't care about the box office.  Their mission is to get W into the public schools and libraries and have it become required viewing in social studies classes much like the way An Inconvenient Truth is now.

Just another waste of time.

I hope that the film doesn't make expenses.

W. Bombs at Box Office?!?

PJ,

What's the criteria for a movie "bombing" at the Box office?

Opinions, Controversy, Total revenue, ROI, Revenue per week,  per theater...?

My prediction "W." would make $10 million in it's first weekend was spot on. In 2 weeks it has box office receipts over $18 million. It should surpass its $25.1 million budget with ease in the next couple of weeks. 

For comparison, 'An American Carol' is just shy of breaking $7 million in 4 weeks. It's budget was a whopping $20 million. I would consider it to be a "bomb".

Gosh, look at Maher's 'Religulous' in the past 4 weeks with 'An American Carol'...$10.6 million with a budget of $2.5 million. So, is it profitability or opinion the reason for a movie to "bomb"?

If you say opinion matters and then in the same breath spout how profitable a movie like 'Fireproof' has become with its $500K budget and $23.6 million box office receipts... then you must also add An Inconvienent Truth, The Blair Witch Project, Fahrenheit 9/11.

Übercon

"The voice of dissent must be heard."-Henry Ford

huh?

Did you even read the original post?  Let me quote some salient text:

"The $30M negative cost film should end up with $23M domestic box office gross by the end of its North American run. That means, with a $25M P&A investment and Lionsgate's distribution fees, the film won't recoup."

Your unqualified statement "It should surpass its $25.1 million budget with ease in the next couple of weeks" is at direct odds with this.  But even assuming it does narrowly surpass its $25.1 million budget, that's pretty pathetic.

Bottom line is, what kind of anti-American capitalist-propagandist puts out a disparaging film about a sitting elected American President?

 

And Darkness and Decay and the Red Death held illimitable dominion over all.   -- Edgar Allan Poe

Clinton Screen Play

I'm working on a screen play about the Clinton presidency. Well, not really. I'm just thinking of all the good trailers I could use to hype such a movie. Let's see... There's Bill wagging his finger at us saying "I did not have sexual relations with that woman...". And then there's Juanita Broaddrick scene where he tells her "You'd better get some ice for that". Or the scene where the secret service has to step in when Hillary starts tossing things at Bill in the White House. Or falling down the stairs at Norman's house.. etc etc..