Box Office »

According to ERC, The Twilight Saga: New Moon sold roughly $71 million (Variety is reporting $72.7 million) worth of tickets on its opening day -- a number that, if correct, far surpasses the current opening day box office record of $67 million set by The Dark Knight back in 2008. With its $26 million take in midnight showings, that gives the second installment in the Twilight franchise two pretty giant records: Best Midnight Opening and Best Single Day Opening. Next up for the franchise is the three-day opening weekend record, also held by The Dark Knight with $158 million.

So what does this say about us? Well, while it's not as critically acclaimed as, say, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (previous midnight opening record holder) or The Dark Knight, these numbers do show just how much of an impact the female audience can have on a box office take. Sure, when The Dark Knight broke records everyone wanted to single out the teenage male audience as having won that film its titles, but polls showed females were responsible for upwards of 50% of that film's opening box office too. And now, with New Moon breaking records attracting a younger female audience, here's hoping studios wake up and realize that, yeah, the female audience is a damn powerful force.

So kudos to all you Twi-hards for showing up to support the property you love. Is the film truly worthy of its new records? Probably not. Will another film break those records within the next year? Yeah, most likely. But dammit if the folks at Summit Entertainment aren't partying their asses off this weekend. They just won the World Series at the box office. Congrats!

Just the other day, I tackled the notion of whether A-List actors were becoming an endangered species. Now Forbes is adding to the celebrities woes with a list of Hollywood's 10 Most Overpaid Stars. Their criteria for the list: Look at the 100 biggest stars who have starred in at least 3 flicks opening in more than 500 theaters in the last 5 years, and calculate a return-on-investment by dividing total operating income on the 3 movies by the actor's total compensation (salaries and sales earnings).

So, who could possibly end up on such a list? Hazard a guess? Well, here are some hints. The 10-spot actor, who has the biggest earnings for his pay, earns an average of $8.62 for every $1 paid, while the worst offender skyrocketed to the #1 spot with a pretty big flop this year, earning only $3.29 for every buck paid. Some of the names in the middle are quite expected, especially Tom Cruise and Eddie Murphy, the former still dealing with image issues, and the latter found out that his silly-comedy formula isn't working like it used to. Also, there is one lone woman on the list, but this actress might be a little hard to guess.

Considering the previous post and some of the names on this list, I think we might be seeing a big decrease in star-power pay over the next few years. But for now ... Who's the least-bad investment, the worst, and the woman? Can you figure out the names in-between? Take a stab and then check out the list after the jump

There was a time, not too long ago, when the dream was to be on the A-list in Hollywood. Being so high up on the ladder meant great roles, great movies, and box office success. It was a world raining money. Now, however, not only are times tough, but Hollywood is learning a valuable lesson: It's not all about the stars. (Something we wondered about three years ago.)

Reuters reports that the movie town is rethinking the millions of dollars they spend to grab the big stars because big celebrity doesn't necessarily equal big box office. They cited the money brought in by The Hangover, District 9, Paranormal Activity, and the Twilight Saga, and the fact that none of these productions had big celebs leading the way. Meanwhile, the star extravaganzas like A Christmas Carol, Surrogates, Funny People, Land of the Lost, Imagine That, and Duplicity boasted big-name talent, but still flopped. Now insiders say that the stars used to big paychecks and gross profit deals are having a heck of a time getting their demands met. As Reuters says: "several films have shown that a great concept or story can trump star appeal when it comes to luring fans."

What a concept! A worthy story being more important than the actors who star? Crazy talk! Could we, dare I say, be headed towards a Hollywood where they don't just write a bunch of crap to have big names appear in (say, Sandra Bullock), and actually put some more effort into the story? Or will we just get greeted by the same crappy stories, but now with unknown names?

You gotta wonder how many studio people see the buzz and money pouring in for the Twilight franchise and want to break things -- not for dislike of the plot, but because that sucker was passed up by major studios and fighting turnaround before Summit grabbed it and made it for little money only to watch it earn a killing. But it looks like that will be nothing in comparison to what could happen with New Moon.

According to Nikki Finke, the sequel has become the top advanced ticket seller ever on Fandango. Twilight was able to make it to the 5-spot, but was never able to bust through the biggie competition like installment number two (part of its success could be due to the film selling advanced tickets beginning in September). What's the biggie competition? The Dark Knight was 4, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince rested at 3, and Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith used to be on top. Yes, folks, Stephenie Meyer's vampires are obliterating some of our classic fandom.

Now the question is whether New Moon can break through to the top 100 grossing movies of all time. Twilight wasn't able to grab a spot on the list, making only $383 million, while the lowest spot is Die Another Day with $432 mil. But the first of the series also wasn't trouncing beloved flicks like The Dark Knight. At the very least, I'd presume it gets on the list.

What do you think will happen when the werewolves and vampires descend upon the theaters this week? Could New Moon transcend its niche and becoming a regular box office success?

Occasionally you'll hear a movie branded as "criticproof," which I take to be a derisive term implying that the masses will flock even though the movie in question is garbage If there's an entire genre that may now get described as "criticproof" it's the disaster movie. No amount of bad reviews could keep people away from watching Roland Emmerich destroy the world anew in 2012, which made $65 million domestically and $225 million worldwide. The domestic numbers are comparable to The Day After Tomorrow which, among other things, ran 40 minutes shorter. The foreign numbers are even stronger. Those who've seen the movie shouldn't be surprised. Think of it what you will (it's probably my favorite Emmerich film, which is not saying a lot), but it's pretty incomparable as special effects spectacle.

2012 had the box office pretty well to itself this weekend. Its only new competition in even semi-wide release was Pirate Radio, which largely flopped despite the enthusiastic pimping of the Love Actually connection -- under $3 million on 880 screens. Faring better was Precious, which expanded to just under 200 screens and earned $6 million. With Precious and Paranormal Activity, this is proving to be a good season for slow roll-out platform releases; Precious seems to be doing a nice job of building awards buzz, too.

As expected, A Christmas Carol turned out to be durable, still running way ahead of The Polar Express, and looking to get a bump from the Thanksgiving holiday in a couple weeks. Look for this one to stick around the top 5 for a little while. On the other hand, the reign of 2012 meant big hits for the holdover genre films, including The Fourth Kind, The Box, and Paranormal Activity.

The box office chart after the jump.

Oren Peli is having the greatest Friday the 13th of his life. We all love the shifting Holiday, but none of us can be as happy to greet today as the director of Paranormal Activity, whose film will be hurtling over the $100 million threshold at some point today, which, like his film, is simultaneously believable and unbelievable. I can clearly see why it has dominated at the box office, but I don't think anyone involved with the film (either before or after it was bought) prophesied how monumentally successful it would become.

But I'm not here to tell you once again that you should go see Paranormal Activity, you've already heard that a thousand times over. I would, however, like to use this time to give Oren Peli a standing ovation by putting things a little further into perspective. Within another week, PA will have grossed more money than the cumulative totals of Halloween II, The Uninvited, The Stepfather, and Saw VI. Their combined budgets? Approximately $60 million. If that doesn't show a little innovation goes a long way, I don't know what does.

More at HorrorSquad!

As much as some people hate to talk about the box office side of the movie business, every film buff at least thinks about the opening haul at one point or another. There are those who idly glance at who landed in first place or who took third -- and then there are those who make financial predictions that require actual decimal placement. Regardless of which side you find yourself relating to, I at least guarantee that every single film geek has looked up showtimes at their local theater and groaned at the line-up, wondering why aren't they showing the new Indie X or how coming Blockbuster Y is still taking up two screens.

Well now there is a website that combines the fascination of what's popular with the frustration of trying to decide what's popular. It's called FlickPicks and it lets anyone who signs up become a virtual movie theater owner for free. It works a little like this: You have Monday through Thursday to choose what films you're going to show and how many screens each film is going to occupy. On Friday FlickPicks locks down your selections and then once the numbers roll in on over the weekend, invisible computer elves calculate how much money your hypothetical theater made and assign points accordingly.

Oprah is pushing both Precious and the book it's based on, Push by Sapphire, on her show, and I'm seriously curious to know what her audience will think about it. How many people will be able to watch a film told from the point of view of an illiterate high schooler who is raped by her father, physically (and, in the book, sexually) abused by her mother, hates herself for not being white, has given birth to one child with Down's Syndrome who's nicknamed Mongo (short for Mongoloid), and is pregnant for a second time with her father's child?

Let's assume that Oprah's reach is strong enough and far enough to get her demographic to plunk down their eight to 12 dollars to see Precious – the Oprah Effect in full effect. (You can find out where and when Precious is playing near you on the official movie website.)

I'm not talking about critics and journalists or the people in big cities who like to participate in a friendly Oscar pool or want to be up on what was in the New York Times. They're already seeing the movie in droves; it made $1.8M in limited release its opening weekend. The latest numbers I could find on her demographic are from 2007, back when people were wondering if Oprah could help get a president elected. (Answer: Yes, she can.)

According to Nielsen via MSNBC, "Oprah's audience is predominantly female, white, and over the age of 55. Nationally 7.4 million people watch Oprah daily -- about 2.6% of American households. Four percent of American women (about 5.7 million) watch her daily, compared with 1.2% of men (1.7 million people). Overall, 2% of all 18- to 49-year-olds watch Oprah."

Indie Roundup is your guide to what's new and cool in the indie film world.

On-Demand / Online Viewing. Love him or find him irritating, he's practically a category unto himself now. Joe Swanberg continues to explore the endlessly fascinating topic of twenty-something romantic relationships in Young American Bodies, a web series now on IFC.com. Season 4 debuted on Monday at IFC.com, and future episodes of the five-part series will premiere on a weekly basis. If you're a Swanberg fan, you'll want to check it out: it expands on his vision of sex and everything that leads up to it and follows afterward: elusive, kinda real, kinda fake, pretty messy.

In honor of Veterans Day, SnagFilms presents a selection of films appropriate for the occasion, covering a national shrine in Arlington: Field of Honor, dangerous missions in Baghdad Bound: Devil Dog Diaries, remembering the Battle for Midway, and so one. Truly, there's something for everyone to discover among the documentaries showcases. Similarly, Hulu has two films of interest: Jerabek, the tragic story of U.S. Marine Ryan Jerabek, and When I Came Home, which covers the troubling issue of homelessness among veterans.

Also newly available online: the enchanting "banjo player goes to Africa" doc Bela Fleck: Throw Down Your Heart (on iTunes) and a close-up (sorry) view of artist Chuck Close (also on iTunes).

Deals. As always, our friends at indieWIRE has been tracking recent acquisitions. The latest: romance My Year Without Sex (Strand Releasing, due spring 2010); drama The Good Heart, with Brian Cox and Paul Dano, directed by the very talented Dagur Kari (Magnolia Pictures, due next year); and social satire The Joneses, with David Duchovny and Demi Moore (Roadside Attractions, due spring 2010).

After the jump: more than Precious at the box office.

The final numbers are in, and the estimated $1.8 million earned by Precious in its limited-release opening weekend wasn't an exaggeration. In fact, it was a little short: The Sundance-prize-winning, Oprah-endorsed indie drama actually made $1,872,458 between Friday and Sunday. (Numbers courtesy of Box Office Mojo.) The reason that's so impressive is that it was only playing in 18 theaters, for an average of $104,025 per theater. For comparison's sake, A Christmas Carol made $8,159 per theater.

So let's put on our nerd hats and break down those Precious numbers. While it's only in 18 theaters, it played on 35 screens, because most cineplexes, anticipating the demand, booked two prints. (The per-screen average, therefore, was $53,499.) I looked at each theater's listings and added up how many showings the movie had over the weekend. That number was 507.

Then the math: It made $1,872,458 in 507 showings, for an average of $3,693 per showing. The average ticket price at the theaters in question is $11 (disregarding things like senior discounts and slightly cheaper prices for Friday matinees). That means each screening sold an average of about 335 tickets, which is surely the capacity for a lot of those theaters. That means a sell-out crowd for almost every screening. I guess I could have found out how many people each theater seats and determined exactly how many sell-outs there were, but that would be silly.

Box Office Mojo says the $104,025 per-theater average is the 12th highest ever -- but the 11 films ahead of it were all playing in no more than six locations. Precious played in 18 and still had a huge per-theater average. Any way you slice it, the delightful feel-good romp of the year opened with a splash.