"Sex And The City" Box Office Soars

Talk about great Sex! Friday's opening was a sold-out blow-out! Really early North American box office numbers for Sex And The City could be as high as $26 million to $28 million and for the weekend $65 million to $75 million. That's stunning the Hollywood pros. "It could reach or exceed the high end if the final West Coast numbers match the East Coast's. Those totals are huge," one rival studio exec exclaimed to me. "It's a true sensation. People thought it would do well. But nothing like this. The top end expected was $40M." Still, some experts wonder if this HBO Films/New Line/Warner Bros pic is a front-loaded phenomenon and the numbers won't hold on Saturday. But Sex And The City will beat last weekend's No. 1 blockbuster from Paramount and Spielberg/Lucas, Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull

Read the whole story here.

Comments

[mamacat]

Went and saw Indie Jones. Waste of money. I think I will try to avoid that mistake with this new "blockbuster."

[mamacat]

In fairness, our kids were crazy about SATC when it was on TV, and I would be surprised if they do not end up going to see this new movie, and enjoying it.

[snideelf]

It was just a recycling of ideas and scenes from the other Jones movies.
Plus, they borrowed the idea of a flying saucer buried underground from John Carpenter's "The Thing" and also from the X Files.
That episode of X Files also has the saucer coming up from the ground and into the sky.

[ann1]

I just don't get it?

[ReggaeFan]

Am I the only woman who doesn't get this show?

[AmericaIsATerroist]

No, you're just one of the fortunate ones who hasn't been sucked into thinking that "hey, my life can be like that too!." I want to wretch every time I see SJP's horse face anywhere.

[GalaxieGal]

Nope.

[Bushgoesnucular]

On behalf of all the men I know...... "ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ."

[truthyguy]

The movie is pure crap. Self-indulgent characters who draw no viewer empathy speaking dialog that could have been written by a 16 year old stoner. But, hey, if you can market it to the gullible and make millions, why not?

[gorgol]

Hmm...sounds like the Bush administration...

[standforpeace]

The folks in Hollywood always seem surprised when anything but the same played out formulaic crap sells. Or when movies that feature anything other than white guys (either young ones or middle aged) or a very select group of Black men (really just Denzel and Will) do well. How about making some really good movies with great acting and story and then putting some effort into marketing them? How about expanding the ranks of those who get to play the leads to be a better reflection of the potential viewing audience? For example, I watched a recent episode of Grey's Anatomy in which Jurnee Smollet had a guess spot and saw this young African American actor acting her ass off. My thought was why doesn't she get more roles? Why doesn't someone write a script and get it greenlighted in which a stunning young actor like this gets a chance in the lead role? I mean damn.

[NASCARLiberal]

Not just Denzel and Will ... any movie with Morgan Freeman wil get me to the theater, and Sam Jackson! Quite a few others too! Pray that now Gary Dourdan is no longer tied to CSI, Hollywood gives us a flood of movies featuring him. I'll go to any and ALL of those! Huge talent and GORGEOUS!!

But, the theater was FILLED today, Saturday, when I went to see Sex In The City. You have got to love this movie! I think "similar" movies won't necessarily be as popular. They've tried this formula for other TV series but none have hit the great combo of "personalities" that shine from the characters in Sex In The City. These four women are seriously flawed but any woman can identify with some part of each of them. And, any woman who CAN'T identify with them must be living in a cave somewhere.

Nice to see these 4 woman getting older (Samantha turnes 50!!) and still staying just the same at heart. A lot like real life ... except for the shoes!! Who has the money for all those gorgeous SHOES!!??

After the movie, I did have to go get a "shoe fix" immediately! Fortunately I was already at a mall!

[mamacat]

Good point. I wonder how much of formulaic movie-making is caused by the desire to make a quick buck?

We were sitting around talking about movies last night, and the young people at the table, even though they lamented the lack of quality and entertainment value in most of the Hollywood blockbusters, they still refuse to go and see independent and foreign films.
If it weren't for the independents and the foreign films, my spouse and I would hardly ever go to the movies. And yet, trying to get most people to go and see them is harder than getting them to go to the dentist's office.

We dragged our kids to the movies with us when they were little, but even so, they hardly ever go and see what we think of as good movies.

[ENK727]

Since this movie is doing so well at the box office I predict that in the next year or two movies studios will be scrambling to make similar themed movies... I can see it now.

[andvoodoo2]

The studios might make "similar themed movies", but they won't do well. SATC had several years as a major show on HBO with which to build it's fan base. It took years to develop the appeal fans feel for those SATC characters.

[ENK727]

True.. I actually loved the show myself and can't wait to see the movie too.

[wayoutleft]

not the same category in respect to budget. i'm just guessing that for most viewers juno and satc resembled each other more than either resembled action flics like the two i mentioned- just as viewing experiences go. further- these two fillms appear to have done a little better than, for instance, the two action flics i mentioned. you're missing the overall sense of my comment. do you deny that having female leads is something they have in common? do you deny that? of course not. do you deny that the films you mentioned have nazi themes in common? of course not. what i am NOT saying is that these films are the same kind of films for these reasons. i am identifying a couple of common points. in no way am i further comparing the films. i am sticking with the obvious. 2 chick flics have pleasantly surprised; two action male violence pics have disappointed in terms of public response. i am categorizing female lead and action films separately i guess. now if you want to categorize on other criteria like budget- that's equally legitimate and very interesting.

[tinkaboutit]

The Golden Compass opened bigger than this and Huffpo called it a flop. Ariana has no right to complain about the sorry state of the media.

[PaxMundis]

"I'm a Fan of tinkaboutit
The Golden Compass opened bigger than this and Huffpo called it a flop. Ariana has no right to complain about the sorry state of the media."

First of all, you're very wrong. Golden Compass made $25 million in its opening weekend, and it did not make even half its budget back domestically. It was supposed to ignite a franchise a la Lord Ot The Rings, and at this point it's likely the other two movies will ever be made. (Yes, foreign BO is important, but domestic gross makes or breaks a movie). SATC nearly made its budget back in 3 days, which is very good. It will probably drop off quickly (the reviews are pretty weak), but SATC is definitely a relative hit.

[wayoutleft]

i don't "get it" either, really. but i do accept it and respect this huge, involved audience.
for instance, without "getting it" i can tell you that series dvd sales will explode and sets may become scarce, therefore expensive. i believe the ultimate re-release product in a year will be deluxe sets including the series, the movie (with usual extra scenes, director comments, interviews, etc.), and extra discs showing the costuming make-up and designer studio work behind the scenes. this deluxe product will be available in different editions (like vista). versions could retail between $350 and $1200.
high end versions may permit access to exclusive interactive online content. product licensing will be ridiculous. licensing revenue will be staggering. this is an across the board retail and marketing bonanza. that i can tell you. it would have had more carry (sic) into retail with a fall release though, setting up a fall '09 dvd release.

[marymansour]

I am happy for a little good news for a change. I loved Sex And The City and wondered if it would translate to the big screen. Apparently it did. I plan to see it soon.

[ann1]

I don't get it?

[rini]

Me neither. I have always found the series extremely shallow and obsessed with one topic....sex.

[NASCARLiberal]

I find it hard to believe that anyone who watched this series seriously thought the series was about SEX as in copulation. Yes, ithat kind of "sex" was part of the series (but not as much as in many you see on BBC or UNI), but more about sex as in GENDER!!! It is about how females differ (in emotions and psychological aspects) from MEN.

[snideelf]

But isn't that just like most Americans?
Extremely shallow and obsessed with sex.

[levibatgirl]

I can't believe how every news channel is freaking out about this stupid movie?

[wayoutleft]

"stunning hollywood pros"? this is telling me they neither understand or respect television. they bet on rambo and the coens. the smart money bets on juno and satc. congratulations to juno, satc, and all other exceptions to big-screen violence. can you imagine the dvd grosses!! this will not only get those somewhere into 9 figures- it will drag along eight figures in new series dvd sales.
but i still miss MY new york girls- barbra's girls- with their causes, french films, leg-warmers, and cats.
can't resist an i-told-you-so: i was corresponding that satc was not being hyped nearly enough; and that it should open regionally to national coverage- like new years' eve is set up. serious promotion with national coverage of midnight openings in bigger markets nationwide would have set up a true phenomenon.

[jerkzilla]

Wow. You just somehow put Juno and Sex in the City in the same category. How.....why? Because they are both "independent " films? Well, no that can't be it... a $65,000,000 budget for Sex in the City is hardly an "independent" film. Also, Sex and The City's budget is TEN TIMES the Budget for Juno. In fact, Sex and the City cost $15,000,000 MORE than Rambo 4, and $40,000,000 more than No Country for Old Men, so there goes that theory. Is it because both films star females? Because that's ridiculous. They are the same kind of movie because they both star women. So, Schindler's List and Ilsa: She Wolf Of The SS are the same because they both take place in Nazi Germany? Now if your point is that both movies are the kind of movies that you, yourself would enjoy personally, then I have no argument there. Except that I gave up hoping Hollywood would make all of their movies just for me when I was dragged by my parents to see Yentl. Some people enjoy violent films, so there will always be a market for them. That's just how it is. If you don't like them, DON'T GO SEE THEM. But, the market dictates that there will always be a market for the kinds of movies you like as well. Now they may not make the huge splash that Juno or Sex and The City have made, but they are still there for your enjoyment.

[NASCARLiberal]

Ughh, I thought JUNO was such a waste of viewing time, and ticket price. Much like LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE ... two truly over-rated films. But, then I liked IRON MAN and SEX IN THE CITY equally.

I remember that John F. Kennedy was a great fan of Doris Day & Rock Hudson movies. Movies should be escapist and take you places you don't usually go. IRON MAN & SEX IN THE CITY each in its own way does precisely that. We will spend money, and gas to get to the theaters, if we are given more like that.

[wayoutleft]

jz - my apologies for putting my reply to your post in the wrong place... sorry... it's up there ifr you want to scroll up. i just wasn't saying as much as you thought about similarities.

[PaxMundis]

I didn't Juno much at all (it was, in its way, every bit as formulaic and calculated as SATC) but it was a success in almost exactly the opposite way from SATC: an indie which worked its way into the consciousness by word of mouth. SATC may be "low budget" compared to the other blockbusters, but its marketing budget must be nearly the equal of the other summer movies.

As a male, I can't speak to why SATC is a big success, but IMHO it seems to be just as insulting and shallow about women as, say, the American Pie movies were about young men. I hope most women aren't as materialistic and vapid as the women of SATC (just as, BTW, I hope most men aren't as sexist and idiotic as the men in most comedies), but I doubt that movies about "real" people, male or female, will ever be huge at the box office.

BTW, I beat the crowds this week and saw a brilliant British movie called Son Of Rambow. If you get a chance, check it out. It's exactly the kind of movie that should be a crowd pleaser (think Breaking Away or My Bodyguard - you know, the type of movies where kids are allowed to be kids rather than human sarcasm machines) but will probably fall under the radar.