Weekend Box Office Wrap Up: October 23, 2011

Published 4 years ago by

Paranormal Activity 3 tops the box office Weekend Box Office Wrap Up: October 23, 2011

This week:

Paranormal Activity 3 scares away the competition at the box office; it’s not all for one and one for all for The Three Musketeers - and Johnny English may be Reborn but he’s not topping the box office chart.

The Paranormal Activity franchise is the gift that keeps on giving to Paramount – the films are cheap to produce and they make back some serious coin. This latest installment is budgeted at $5 million, but it should gross over ten times that ($54 million) by Monday morning. The first Paranormal Activity cost just $15,000 (yeah – you read that right) and went on to score $107 million ($193 million globally) – while the sequel opened to $40 million on its way to $84 million ($177 million worldwide) from a $3 million budget.

Poised for a run into Halloween, Paranormal Activity 3 (read our review) should play reasonably well for a horror, but it will have a steep decline once October is over. Having said that, it’s already profitable, so everything from here on out is gravy. Factor in global ticket sales and DVD’s, and anyone with a profit share will more than likely be skipping around their living room. Pencil in Paranormal Activity 4 for next year.

Real Steel should bank another $11.3 million, for a $67 million total. The Hugh Jackman film looks like it might actually limp to a $100 million domestic gross, but it’ll need a lot of fight.

Footloose held up well after last weekend’s disappointing start. The music driven remake should gross $10.8 million for the weekend upping its total to $30 million. It’s a decent figure, but not the hit that the studio (Paramount again) had hoped.

The Three Musketeers fail to top the box office Weekend Box Office Wrap Up: October 23, 2011

Paul W.S. Anderson’s The Three Musketeers (read our review) had a limp $8.8 million debut. The umpteenth remake of Alexandre Dumas’ swashbuckling tale failed to ignite audience interest – even with the added bonus of seeing the action in 3D. Star (and Anderson’s wife) Milla Jovovich came out and lambasted Summit Entertainment’s marketing of the movie – which has taken $50 million outside the US.

George Clooney’s The Ides of March should score another $4.9 million, upping its gross to $29 million. The film is set to become Clooney’s highest grossing film as a director, and it could hit $50 million, if it gets award nominations.

Dolphin Tale should also bank around $4.2 million, upping its cume to $64 million, while fellow holdover; Moneyball should score another $4 million for a $63 million total.

Johnny English Reborn had a low $3.8 million start. Rowan Atkinson’s bumbling spy is joined by former Bond girl Rosamund Pike, X-Files star Gillian Anderson and The Wire’s Dominic West in this sequel to the 2003 film which grossed $28 million ($160 million worldwide). Now, this weak debut seems like a disaster, but the film has already scored about $100 million globally – with more to come, so this US release is just a formality.

Universal’s prequel to The Thing dropped 63% from last weekend. A $3.1 million gross sees the film up its gross to just $14 million. Meanwhile the top ten was rounded out by 50/50. The cancer themed dramedy took a smidgen under $3 million for a $28 million total.

Outside the top ten Cowboys & Aliens finally hit $100 million ($167 million globally). The milestone now means that star Harrison Ford has $100 million hits in every decade since the 70s. It’s also Ford’s thirteenth film to gross more than $100 million – with the Indiana Jones star’s box office average now standing at $104 million. Now there’s something to throw into a conversation at the dinner table!

Follow me on Twitter @CorduroyBrowne

That’s it for now. See you at the movies.

Source: Box Office Mojo

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. So, I take it that means Three Musketeers will have a sequel then?

  2. I took my two nephews and sister to see Real Steel, you know it wasn’t that bad. A good movie to take the kids to. It’ll be a parent DVD fav. Hugh Jackman!

  3. paul anderson is a slave to mila (can’t act) jovovich ;) if he ditched her character in resident evil and made the stories more about the characters in the game (and got actors who look like them *cough*wentworth miller as chris*cough*, then the franchise would make even more $$$ but as it is they only appeal to numbnuts who don’t know anything about the series and just want to see ‘hot’ women, guns and explosions (typically no brainers).

    i don’t like jump scare movies, as they get boring and predictable very fast and i honestly cant see how the boring franchise can keep making cash when the formula is almost always the same.

    • hahaha reality shows are different, this garbage though makes around 50million (average) everytime and is basically the same bs with different characters. i mean are people so arrogant they cant tell they’re (studios) milking the ‘franchise’ ?

      • is it nice up there on your pedestal?

      • The resident evil movies are based on the videogames. Why would you want them to exactly re-enact the games in the movies? That would be dumb. I would rather sit and play the games if that were the case. They brought in a new character to keep it fresh. The characters that are shown in the games aren’t the only survivors. Its showing another perspective. So far from what I have seen, Anderson has not changed any events from the games, atleast drastically. I love both the games and movies.

    • “i don’t like jump scare movies, as they get boring and predictable very fast and i honestly cant see how the boring franchise can keep making cash when the formula is almost always the same.”

      Which jump scare are you referring to? PA? From what I understand of PA3 (and the others) you dont know when the jump is coming…. there is no music or overly pushy/obvious indication.

      So how you can predict a jump/scare when there is no indication is beyond me.

      I mean if you predict it to come every time and it eventually comes well you get it right. However from what I remember from PA1&2 (and in PA3) it is hard to gauge/predict when they will come.

  4. This movie was a hit due to FALSE ADVERTISEMENT, and trusting fans. I consider this to be the most disappointing prequel I have ever seen. The trailer showed the 2 little girls summoning Bloody Mary, and made it seem as though SHE were the original source of the terror. This was BLATANTLY misleading. I am angry and offended. The Paranormal Activity series has lost my respect completely. I don’t know a person alive who hasn’t chickened out during a game of Bloody Mary, and that was an AWESOME premise for the movie that was brazenly NOT THERE AT ALL.


    • Wha????

      You knew it was a demon. The previous other movies made that quite clear. Bloody Mary is not a demon. So how did the series (first two) that pointedly stated it was a demon make you lose respect?

      Ive seen movie clips that make me think a good guy is a bad guy or a bad gut is a good guy…. is that also false advertisement or misleading?

      While I concur I dont like the idea of showing clips in an advert and not have them in the movie it really does not make that big a difference…

      Its a movie about a family being stalked by a demon. The first two were successful and made it quite clear that it was not a ghost, alien, mutant or anything else but a demon.

  5. A bit surprised at the Three Musketeers’ weak debut states-wise. People must have thought it had no sustenance from the advertisements – but then that never stopped them before.

    • It is not that we don’t want remakes. We don’t want bad remakes. Oh wait is we me and you or we as in everyone? Im just speaking for myself.

      The Thing was not a remake or was not supposed to be a remake but a prequel that apparently is a remake….

      3 Musketeers is a remake of what? There has been a ton of 3 Musketeer movies some good some bad.

      Footloose…. I concur remake.

      I mean there are a ton of remakes out there that I am sure you… errr we enjoy.

      Case in point Mr. Carpenters Thing is a remake. Heck if you want to get real technical Captain America, The Hulk, Spiderman, Supermans and Batmans are all remakes.

      Again remakes are fine if they are done well.

      • Well not split hairs. I was speaking in general terms and being a remake/reboot/re-imagining is not always a bad thing but when it is currently making up literally half (or more) of all the current movie projects then yes, Hollywood needs to shift its focus to more original ideas.

        And while the new “The Thing” was labeled a prequel, it followed the exact same formula as the John Carpenter version. So calling it a prequel doesn’t mean it still isn’t a remake. Yes, it was a remake of a 1951 movie but it was one update that worked because of the advancement of FX in those 30 years. This is one of the few reasons why I would support a remake.

        3 Musketeers was a re-imagining which falls into the same general “re-do” category (at least for me). We had an updating back in 1993 and all this version did was take the 1993 cues and mashed it together with the horrible Wild Wild West movie.

        The point is ALL three required minimal effort and creativity to produce, doing nothing but leeching off the past success of their namesakes.


          First sentence should read: “Well let’s not split hairs.”

        • But isn’t that what all the superhero “reboots” do? Leech off prior success?

          Isnt that what movies in general do whne they slap a famous or well known actor/ress in a role? Leeching off their prior success?

          If The Thing was done better would you have minded much? If 3M was done a whole lot better to include no flying ships etc. Would you have minded much?

          While I too want new stuff I also want plain entertainment. I can be entertained by sub par stuff as much as top of the line original award winners. Just depend what im in the mood for.

          If you could do your job with minimal effort with the same pay would you? Some of these hollywood types do too.

          My point is just because it is a remake does not make it poo. What makes it poo are the people behind it.

          • Do superhero movies leech off of their comicbook personas? Absolutely, in fact that’s the plan but the difference between them and a lot of these remakes is the remakes are doing almost nothing BUT leeching. The Comicbook movies STILL have to be good so the name only goes so far (as is evidenced by Green Lantern). Leeching in and of itself can, and often is, an effective tool but it can’t be the movie’s only selling point.

            As I said I don’t mind remakes. What I DO mind is the sheer number of them and how poorly done they are, that’s the #1 problem. They have to be significantly better than the original. Period. Being about the same or even marginally better is not going to cut it. If it isn’t going to accomplish that then it should not be made and Hollywood needs to stop gambling on the old and reliable. So since we are showing that that is as much a gamble as just doing something NEW, all things being equal, new is better.

            As to your questions….

            The Thing – imho CGI didn’t make this any better than the 1982 version and was just the original story repackaged with ALL the same elements. I honestly don’t know how you would make it “better” enough to make it feel significantly different than the 1982 version. This franchise is tapped out imho and would need some new gimmick to make it interesting again.

            3 Musketeers – If they had removed the steampunk elements from it it would be like the 1993 version so there would be no reason to remake it. This is another franchise that is tapped out in its original form. They tried adding to the equation but failed. Really there isn’t anywhere to go so they need to drop it. Even the 1993 version only did ok so I really don’t know why they thought this was a great idea.

            • My 13 yo laughs at me when we watch movies sometimes. WOW you thought this was good when you were growing up?

              What was good 10-15-20 years ago does not do well now a days. There are some that are more forgiving then others of course.

              Using the 3Ms for example at what point do you stop and say.. well guys no more you have to watch the 3Ms we created 20 years ago or never see them on the screen.

              To me a movie is only as good as you want it to be and only as good as it is made. Im sure there are movies that you and I agree on and some that we are polar opposites of.

              “What I DO mind is the sheer number of them and how poorly done they are, that’s the #1 problem.”

              Poorly done I think is the biggest problem and we agree on that. A movie sucks if it sucks regardless if its a remake or not. Maybe if they were done better it wouldn’t seem as though they were coming out as much?

              I mean the adage is nothing really gets noticed unless something goes wrong…