And the movie will more than likely win the oscar for best documentary. I am sure Moore will not take himself out of the running this year.

I only have one thing to say:

Yippe ki yay, mother fucker!

Just to be fair…

Per the Hollywood Reporter, Sicko’s “per-theater average of $10,204 was the second best in the top 10, behind only “Ratatouille’s” $11,987 average.”

Harvey Weinstein, co-chairman of the Weinstein Co., said he wanted to roll “Sicko” out slowly to give it a longer shelf life and keep Moore’s stand for universal health care on the front burner.

“The idea is to hold during the summer and just continue to build this thing,” Weinstein said. “I just think the debate in this country is going to catch up with the movie, so we’ve got to keep it slow.”

“It was always our plan to trail at the half! Thus deepening Bush’s eventual defeat! Also, what game were the refs watching?!”

I wonder if the audiences who flocked to see Sicko also pondered flocking to see A Mighty Heart (about journalist Daniel Pearl)...?

Just to be fair… Per the Hollywood Reporter, Sicko’s “per-theater average of $10,204 was the second best in the top 10, behind only “Ratatouille’s” $11,987 average.”

Ah, but let’s not forget that Ratatouille also premiered in 4000 theaters, compared to Sicko’s 441. A certain per-theater loss is expected with that geographically dense an opening. (Theaters customer crossover, etc.) So to be truly fair, you would have to compare the gross number of tickets sold in geographical areas where both films are being shown. Another point to make is, as cinemas are profit motivated, and so it the Weinstein Co., the only logical reason for a limited release would be a lack of interest on the part of the theaters, generally mandated by their fiscal projections. In the current market, I can certainly understand that. Why waste a theater on Sicko, which would be projected to bring in a fraction of the other dozen films to choose from? It would make more fiscal sense to open a second screen for extra showings of the new Fantastic Four flick than it would to dedicate one to Sicko. I think ole’ Harvey is saving face, nothing more. Sicko’s opening in 441 theaters not because they want to “extend the life” of the film (which is a silly excuse, as limited release does NOT extend a film’s lifespan.). It’s much more likely the case that those 441 theaters simply did not have enough left in their budget to spring for another summer blockbuster, so chose instead for a bargain basement priced flick like Moore’s.

This happens all the time, really. Theaters only have a limited budget
to pay for film rights, and the more the films’ projected to make, the more those rights cost.
This is why you see “Transformers” at the local Giganto-Plex, and “A Mighty Heart” at the little 40-seat indy theater-slash-coffee house in the downtown “historic” section of your city.

Don’t get me wrong, now… kudos to Mike for bringing those kind of numbers to a documentary (whether or not it actually qualifies as one.), but… that doesn’t mean it will be competing with actual commercial films anytime soon. (or, ever.)
And in the movie business, as any other, the bottom line is king.

So to Harvey, don’t try pouring sugar on a cow pattie and selling it as a cookie.

The Weinsteins’ big mistake was to buy into Moore’s own hype and decide that Sicko could be a summer blockbuster. If they’d held it off, released it when hardly anything else is coming out, they might have stood more of a chance.

Instead, they’re pitting it against Live Free or Die Hard and Transformers? That’s some real genius, right there. You’d have thought Moore’s self-awareness would have trumped his ego on that one, but apparently he decided that since he weighed as much as a semi trailer, he was obviously up to taking on Optimus Prime.

This is the end of the road, Mooregatron.

I think at this point no one can really pay much attention to Harvey Weinstein and take his sense of “selling movies” seriously (if Grindhouse is any indication), but ultimately it’s pretty clear that Sicko was never intended to go up against the Die Hards and Transformers of the movie world and compete in that first weekend box-office blitz that really signifies financial success or failure. By comparison, Sicko cost about $9 million, so it earned half of its budget back in the first weekend, and rightfully should expect to continue to lurk on the outside of the top ten throughout its theatrical run. In other words, unlike those blockbusters mentioned above, first weekend grosses are not a categorical indication of success or failure for a movie like Sicko.

In other words, unlike those blockbusters mentioned above, first weekend grosses are not a categorical indication of success or failure for a movie like Sicko.

Funny, when F9/11 did so well, it was trumpeted as a big deal and a victory. And yet, when Sicko does a pale shadow of what it did, it’s… still a big deal and a victory.

Must be nice to win even when you lose. (Though, admittedly, Moore will probably make a decent chunk of change off of the poorer people he’s used up and tossed aside. Again.)

Also, Weinstein Company totally screwed the pooch with a last-minute “rally” in place of a press conference for journalists. I was supposed to go into downtown Los Angeles last Tuesday for a press event for Sicko and the day before we got an email saying that the event “took another turn” (their language, not mine). Instead, they invited press to participate in a rally for the film, and indicated that they would try to reserve some space for press and have “some time” available for questions from the press and from the crowd.

Notwithstanding my disinterest in sharing a microphone with Johnny Jacknapes to ask Moore questions, we declined on the grounds that what could have been an interesting press opportunity (to ask some of the questions/ criticisms addressed on Moorewatch) was turned into a media circus that all but eliminated any in-depth interaction between the media and Moore. Who was directly responsible for this, I don’t know (again, Weinstein doesn’t always choose wisely with whom to promote their movies, with or without Moore at the helm), but needless to say it was a bad decision that could have otherwise afforded the film some coverage. (Instead, I went to an Ice Cube movie set visit, and had a great time.)

Hm. So rather than hold a press conference to inform and field questions about the film, Moore instead expected the journalists to just show up in open and unadulterated SUPPORT for his film.

1) Wow, what arrogance.

2) Oh THAT left-wing media.

As far as I heard, no one among my colleagues actually went to the “rally/press event” as soon as they heard what it was going to be. I requested 1:1s and TV spots with Moore but Weinstein didn’t bow, which is somewhat understandable but kind of a bad idea since the site I write for is primarily aimed at 15-35 year old males and therefore an audience Moore might want to reach. I blame Weinstein for that, not Moore (there are countless horror stories about promoting their other movies that I won’t share), but it’s a bad idea to do an about-face the day before a press conference and say it’s a rally for the film, since few if any credible outlets would ever be party to that.

There’s nothing foreigners, especially Europeans, love more than an American who goes around talking down his own country and talking up Europe

I think you’re wrong there, and it won’t do as well as you might expect in the foreign markets.  Sure they’ll love the slamming of Americans, but then when he talks about the utopian worlds they live in when they know their healthcare industry has plenty of its own problems they’ll sour to the movie.  So big openings to start for the euros with a fast tapering because of how he portrays their life.

but it’s a bad idea to do an about-face the day before a press conference and say it’s a rally for the film, since few if any credible outlets would ever be party to that.

So the NY Times still showed up, right?

I actually don’t know who showed up, and it really isn’t my place to make designations of “credible” or not in retrospect. But I do know that most of my immediate colleagues and friends balked at covering the rally, especially when the opportunity to interview Ice Cube arose.

I can never figure out why Lee or Jim always call him a Fat ****.  One click on Jim K’s profile shows him to be large enough that he could be a long lost twin to Mr.Moore

It’s the rule.  You know how black guys can call each other “nigger” (or “nigga") and it’s cool?  Well, Jim and I, he being a currently fat bastard and I a formerly hugely obese disgusting Jabba the Hutt-looking motherfucker, can call him a fat bastard as much as we like.

Rule of the street and all that.

Not for nothin. , here’s what I wrote about this film on 12-28-2004 here at Moorewatch:

That’s right, Moore hasn’t even started promoting his new film Sicko yet and the controversy is already starting. Drug companies are issuing warnings in their newesletters to be on the lookout for a"portly" fellow in a baseball cap, especially if he has a camera crew in tow. They are advising employees to keep their big mouths shut. No doubt Moore will still find his next Lila Lipscomb, and he’ll use some more footage from other sources to complete his next project, but I think the genie is out of the Michael Moore ambush style of film making bottle. People are getting wise to him, and he has nobody to blame but himself.

That being said , Moore will still finish his movie and prepare a place on his mantle for yet another undeserved film award, but this time I think he’s in for a bit if a suprise.

You see, pharmaceutical compaines and HMO’s don’t exactly have the intrigue of Fahrenheit 9/11. F9/11 looked at the worst case of terrorism on US soil in our history, a subject that everyone could relate to, since we were all part of that story.  Had Moore been able to dig up some legitimate smoking guns, the film might have been actually relevant for something other than it’s historic irrelevance. I mean, c’mon! 200 million dollars at the box office, a 60 city slacker tour, and even the Palme D’whatever and he still couldn’t convince a majority of people to dump George Bush?

In Sicko, I actually think Moore will be able to dig up some smoking guns. The problem is, that the smoking guns all belong to the drug companies. Since we don’t vote for drug company presidents, the topic won’t ring and clearly with the public. One sector of people the movie will raise an eyebrow from however, is stockholders. If Moore succeeds is creating some legitimate boogeymen in the drug company business, the stock values will suffer. And just who holds stock in drug companies? Well, about 40% of Americans are stock owners either in common shares, or through mutual funds and 401K programs, and many of us own shares is pharmaceutical companies even if we don’t know it.

If Moore is successful in beating the daylights out of the pharmaceutical industry, a lot of folks stand to lose a lot of money, including their retirements accounts.  Nice , huh?

The thing is, stock ownership knows no political ideology. There are barking moonbat liberals out there with very similar portifolios to the radical right-wing nuts they so despise. I doubt anyone will look at Moore with the same admiration when they start having to recalculate their retirement plans. I predict a new catch phrase from the left when describing this movie: TOO FAR.

I can see it now:

“When Michael went after the gunowners and republicans, I thought it was GREAT, but now, it’s like he’s coming after ME! I think he’s gone too far”.

It won’t take long for the sentiment surrounding Moore’s next movie as “not-as-good-as-the-last-one-for-whatever-reason” to ricochet throughout the country. Ticket sales will be of dismal proportions. I predict he may not reach 40% of the success of F911. Sure, there are folks out there that would be willing to pay ten bucks to watch Moore make a BM, but for many of us, we would argue that that’s what the last few movies were anyway. It’s just worse when that BM is aimed at you, and our liberal soon-to-be-former-Moore-fan friends will know exactly what we are talking about. 

The bottom line is, for all the things that people claim made F911 successful, Sicko will have very few of those attributes, and Moore is facing an uphill battle in selling something like that to the public.  My guess is Moore will probably throw together the next Fahrenheit movie first, and in his hurry to cash in, he’ll leave folks lamenting that as far as sequels go, it will fall somewhere between The Godfather part III and Weekend at Bernies II.

I might have been right about some of that stuff. I was wrong about the F911 sequel though. Oh, well, One can’t be right all the time.

This isn’t really a fair comparison.

Ratatouille is a). a Pixar film and b). directed by Brad Bird (Iron Giant, Incredibles).  Talk about two directors who do the same task in very different styles.

For example, both will carefully craft their scenes to elicit just the right amount and timbre of emotion from their audience.  But while Brad Bird will take a cartoon character and make it more believable than most live humans, Michael Moore will take a real life situation and satirize and exaggerate and distort until it bears a cartoonish sort of surrealism.

Oh, and also, Bird will tell you to your face that his movie is fictional.

I think you’re wrong there, and it won’t do as well as you might expect in the foreign markets.  Sure they’ll love the slamming of Americans, but then when he talks about the utopian worlds they live in when they know their healthcare industry has plenty of its own problems they’ll sour to the movie.  So big openings to start for the euros with a fast tapering because of how he portrays their life.

You have a point here, Buzzion.  The rank and file of the European populace with realize that Moore’s presentation is an over-idealized picture of the real situation.  Most hard working people in Europe, from the North Cape to Malta would be offended at that French chappie living it up on the taxpayers’ money.  That is my experience of the attitudes here.

Most people in Europe realize there are grounds to be declared unable to work. But a brazen misuse of the system that, in the case of France, is going to have to undergo some sort of reform would actually anger an average working Joe who pays his or her taxes and tries to do a hard day’s work to have the self-respect of earning their living.

It probably won’t do much to offend the Euro elites who have barely worked a day in their lives outside of politics.  They would consider themselves unable to comment on the individual case being presented by Moore in his film. 

Therein lies the rub, the sign of a greater problem within Europe of a ruling elite increasingly out of touch with the people they rule.  And the elites go out of their way to try to defame and destroy any party or person who might question the collective wisdom of the ruling political parties.

"This is the end of the road, Mooregatron.”

Grin.  Sicko is already #14 on the all time “Documentary” Box Office list, only after a week.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=documentary.htm

I’d guess it will end up at #3.  Calling it a “bomb” or the “end of the road” is a little silly.

Calling it a “bomb” or the “end of the road” is a little silly.

I agree.  It will likely do very well, and will likely be Oscar-nominated.
But calling it a documentary is still a bit of a stretch…

"But calling it a documentary is still a bit of a stretch…”

Grin.  I am sure that topic has been covered here 1000 times already so I will not even touch it!  lol

But the fact remains, Sicko is no bomb.

Now #444 on the list, sitting at a box office of $577.....  NOTES ON MARIE MENKEN.  Now that’s a bomb!!

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=notesonmariemenken.htm

I’d guess it will end up at #3.  Calling it a “bomb” or the “end of the road” is a little silly.

It’s a Transformers reference. Because, you know, he decided to pit it against Transformers.

You fail it.

(But then, you’re also posting “Grin.” and “lol”, so I doubt anyone’s surprised.)

“It’s a Transformers reference. Because, you know, he decided to pit it against Transformers.”

“Mooregatron” is a transformers reference? Who knew?

“You fail it.” WTF does that mean?

“(But then, you’re also posting “Grin.” and “lol”, so I doubt anyone’s surprised.)”

Sorry, keeping things a little ‘light’ and using a acronym or two was the wrong thing to do. Looking back at your posts on this topic, obviously that is something that you are not big on.

“You fail it.” WTF does that mean?

... Anyone else reminded of donut seeds?