In a somewhat surprising result, the heavily-advertised action-fantasy
Sucker Punch (
teaser/
trailer) did not top the box office
this weekend, losing a close race to the lower-profile but popular
Diary of a Wimpy Kid franchise.
Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick Rules was number one for the weekend, with $24.4 million. The second film in the series comes just over a year after 20th Century Fox released the premiere entry (titled simply
Diary of a Wimpy Kid) took the number-two slot with $22 million. With no massive
Alice in Wonderland standing it is way this time, the further adventures of Zachery Gordon promoted itself to the top slot. The original film cost $15 million and ended up with $65 million in domestic sales. The sequel cost just $21 million and will theoretically end up in the same $60-70 million ballpark. This is certainly not a strong overseas franchise (the original grossed just $11 million in foreign markets), but 20th Century Fox has no reason not to keep pumping out adaptations of the long-running (five books so far) kid-lit series as long as the price is right. So, coming March 2012:
Diary of a Wimpy Kid: The Last Straw.
Coming in at second place was Zach Snyder's ambitious action-fantasy
Sucker Punch (
)
. The $85 million female-led adventure grossed just $19 million in its debut weekend. While Warner Bros. sold the film as a bubble-gum female empowerment epic, the film was actually a messy and dark examination of the sexualization of women in geek culture and the overall acceptance of institutional sexism. Stymied by the difficult-to-explain narrative and reviews that just couldn't see past the fishnets and colorful visuals, the film is
of geek excitement
into mainstream interest. By itself, a $19 million opening weekend isn't all that troubling, the film had a mediocre 2.3x weekend multiplier, so legs are unlikely. The picture scored a mere B- from Cinemascore, meaning that audiences were as caught off-guard as critics. The one possible saving grace will be the overseas markets, which may well respond to the potent visuals and genuinely subversive undertones. This is a prime example of 'why we can't have nice things'. We all complain about mainstream entertainment lacking a point of view or challenging and imaginative material and when one comes along, the critics at large take a collective dump on it (it wasn't SUPPOSED to be traditionally empowering!!!) while audiences choose not to flock to it. Enjoy your
Chutes and Ladders: the Movie
.
As expected, the film played 64% male and 74% under-35. It will be interesting to see how this affects Zach Snyder's relationship with Warner Bros. This is his first purely original film, and he did bring it in at $85 million and at the request PG-13, the latter
it would seem. But this is his third-straight money loser for the company in a row, following
Watchmen
and
Legend of the Guardians
. Ironically, his one unqualified smash-hit
300
, was his least engaging and least intellectually accomplished film so far. Go figure. Anyway, Warner Bros. successfully did damage control today by announcing that Amy Adams will be playing Lois Lane in Snyder's
Superman
picture, and we're sure to hear in the next few weeks just how deeply involved Chris Nolan is, as opposed to the now 'damaged goods' Zach Snyder. Still, this is yet another classic example of a filmmaker trying and (
) failing and being ridiculed for it, while other filmmakers who fail to even try escape scrutiny. I'd rather have the Zach Snyders of the world swinging for the fences and merely scoring a ground-rule double.
Anyway, in holdover news, The Lincoln Lawyer (review) and Limitless both scored sensational holds, with the films having second weekend drops of just 16.7% and 19.5% respectively. As I've said a billion times, older audiences do like having films pitched at them once in awhile and the rock-solid business of these two star-driven adult thrillers are prime examples. Limitless sits at $41 million while The Lincoln Lawyer sits with $28 million. Limitless is a one-and-done, but Lincoln Lawyer's Mick Haller has several other literary adventures in print, so Lionsgate and Matthew McConaughey may have a franchise on their hands (god willing...). The best film of 2011, Rango (review) became one of the two first films of the year to cross $100 million, as it now sits with $103 million. Also joining the century club this weekend was the Adam Sandler/Jennifer Aniston rom-com Just Go With It. Gnomeo and Juliet ($95 million) and The Green Hornet (review) with $97 million may join them if screen-bleeding and/or a lack of second-run theaters don't prevent that.
Battle: Los Angeles (review) sits at $72 million in seventeen days, making $100 million domestic less-than-likely. Paul dropped 43% in weekend two ($24 million thus far), but the film is running about even with Hot Tub Time Machine, meaning that the spiritualistic-atheism comedy has a shot at $40 million, which will make it by far the most successful of the Simon Pegg/Nick Frost vehicles thus far. In limited release, Win Win ($679,000) and Jane Eyre ($1.8 million) continue to burn up the arthouse chart, and Cedar Rapids ($6.1 million) again proves that it should have been a wide releaser. Oh, and mazel tov to CBS Films' Beastly, which surpassed my expectations and crossed the $25 million mark this weekend. I was wrong, as this one has something approaching legs.
That's it for this weekend. Join us next time for a stupidly crowded weekend, with three wide releases (Hop, Insidious, and Source Code), a PG-13 re-release of The King's Speech (f*ck no, do not go!), and a handful of noteworthy limited debuts (Super, Wrecked, Trust, and Rubber). Spread the wealth people... spread the wealth.
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
It's Another Trump-Biden Showdown — And We Need Your Help
The Future Of Democracy Is At Stake
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
Your Loyalty Means The World To Us
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
The 2024 election is heating up, and women's rights, health care, voting rights, and the very future of democracy are all at stake. Donald Trump will face Joe Biden in the most consequential vote of our time. And HuffPost will be there, covering every twist and turn. America's future hangs in the balance. Would you consider contributing to support our journalism and keep it free for all during this critical season?
HuffPost believes news should be accessible to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay for it. We rely on readers like you to help fund our work. Any contribution you can make — even as little as $2 — goes directly toward supporting the impactful journalism that we will continue to produce this year. Thank you for being part of our story.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
It's official: Donald Trump will face Joe Biden this fall in the presidential election. As we face the most consequential presidential election of our time, HuffPost is committed to bringing you up-to-date, accurate news about the 2024 race. While other outlets have retreated behind paywalls, you can trust our news will stay free.
But we can't do it without your help. Reader funding is one of the key ways we support our newsroom. Would you consider making a donation to help fund our news during this critical time? Your contributions are vital to supporting a free press.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our journalism free and accessible to all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. Would you consider becoming a regular HuffPost contributor?
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. If circumstances have changed since you last contributed, we hope you'll consider contributing to HuffPost once more.
Support HuffPostAlready contributed? Log in to hide these messages.