Box Office: "Fly Me to the Moon", a rare romcom wide release with big stars, opens this week

If it had been twisted into the big screen treatment of “Gilligan’s Island” that I had proposed, we would be talking competitive box office.

She receives top billing. Makes it seem like a chick flick.

A very odd film to get this kind of summer release. I don’t see how anyone would expect this to be a hit in the current moviegoing climate.

Fuck you, R2.

We want to see them fuck!

She's old. Her tits can't save her now.

And he is...not attractive anymore.

😴

Sandra Bullock occasionally got away with romantic comedies in her late 50s because it was high comedy and action, but she is one of the all time greatest romantic comedy heroines in American cinema, which is no small thing as she blew up after Meg Ryan and Julia Roberts were already massive stars.

But in their early-mid 40s, these two have aged out of this genre. By this point, I think younger viewers expect people this age to have gotten it together already. They need a more middle-aged take on the genre.

Longlegs will demolish it.

Only grossing $10 million for opening weekend.

I will probably see it this weekend because we still don't have power. Last week, I saw The Fall Guy and The Bikeriders. They weren't bad. This looks stupid based on the previews, but it can't be worse than Ticket to Paradise-- truly awful.

Huge embarrassment but thankfully it puts an end to Greg Berlanti being given a high profile feature.

This was intended to be straight to streaming and was originally going to costar Chris Evans. These actors in their forties took enormous salaries - these two are maybe getting $20 million each - on the presumption that it wasn’t going theatrical. It did and now they have flop attached to them. Tatum’s Magic Mike 3 was also intended for streaming, got moved to theatrical because of pandemic/strike product shortage, and bombed.

There is no easy money in Hollywood.

I've seen one ad for this.

BTW, I'm sure the reason for the July release date is because the first moon landing was also in July. The one trailer I saw made it look like a fun movie, but better for streaming than a trip to the cinema.

She’s only 39.

[quote] she is one of the all time greatest romantic comedy heroines in American cinema, which is no small thing as she blew up

Pics please.

R15: That's 140 in actress years. Tick tock tick tock.

The NYT review was not good.

Hollywood is always the last to get the message - movie theaters are OVER. It’s an archaic venue. You’re wasting your time.

[quote] These actors in their forties

How are their ages relevant?

R8, young viewers don’t have money nor go to theaters. They’re catering to the 40 year olds. Regardless, no one likes these movies.

It flopped. But since it's an Apple production, it doesn't matter.

I disagree that it doesn’t matter, because Apple is greenlighting uncommercial films, giving them huge budgets, then releasing them in theaters with legacy studio partners who are handed a turkey they can’t market, and which further damages the credibility of theatrical exhibitions. This is the second film Apple ludicrously overpaid for to be released in theaters this year: the first, Argylle, cost $200 million, and this one cost $100 million. Apple will take a $300 million writedown on two films. That’s not sustainable, Apple can set fire to its own money but Hollywood is on quicksand and doesn’t need bombs like this.

Deadline points out that a movie like Fly Me to the Moon, Down With Love, was made twenty years ago and did poorly (7 million opening) but it was only made for $35 million. So the opening was roughly the same while the budget increased by three times! Not sustainable!

Neither of these actors is known for their skill with comedy

The problem is both the premise and the leads. A romcom about the moon landing is not exactly fresh. Plus Scarlett and Channing are amateur actors.

I don’t think there’s anything that could be done. People simply do not go to the movies to see these kinds of films anymore. Which I actually think sucks. I want all kinds of films in the theaters. I still like the theatrical experiences. Younger people don’t seem to. The only rom com, “chick flick” kind of film that’s going to pull in a big audience is going to be a big event. Like something based on a known IP or featuring the acting debut of a massive star like T Swift or something.

Are these extremely tedious box office threads the work of Davida?

If the thread is tedious, why are you reading it?

I saw it because I wanted to go to the movies. It was sometimes clever, somewhat fun, pretty nostalgic, and had good visuals.

The cast overall is good, except for Channing Tatum, who could hav been carved from wood and placed on the set, in most scenes. He has zero comedic timing or nuance.

I give it a B. With a better male lead, it might have done a lot better.

Longlegs was a (somewhat) surprise hit this weekend. It broke a number of records--highest opening for its distributor, Neon, and the biggest opening for an independent horror film ever. I was skeptical about the projections for it, but they were right on the money. I saw it Friday night and my theater was probably 90% full. I can't remember the last time I was at the movies and had that happen.

Tatum is ovah.

This could have been a hit 10 years ago but they are both past their prime.

Her husband sunk money into a boat business with Pete Davidson.

R31: Scarjo isn’t far behind either.

R30: The marketing was brilliant. They didn't over-promote or oversell it.

[quote] She’s only 39.

Still?!

Tatum's career now consists of just co-starring with bitches.

[quote]I don’t think there’s anything that could be done. People simply do not go to the movies to see these kinds of films anymore.

Hmmm.