Damn I was really hoping to be wrong about G-Force! Oh well, at least Funny People should do well next weekend (I'm guessing $28 million.) but unless Aliens In The Attic pulls a big surprise (My guess is $16 million.) it should still be a pretty depressing week box-office wise.

I'm sure Funny People is going to win next weekend. Considering 40-Year-Old Virdin made $21.4 mil., and Knocked Up followed with $30.7 mil and pretty much the same ratings from critics and audiences alike, I believe FP has a very good shot at $35-45 million.

This doesn't have to do much with box office analysis, but it's something I've been noticing lately and I just have to say it:

Why everytime, every sunday morning when I come to this page hoping to see and read comments about THIS weekend, about the behaviour of movies and box office numbers of THIS weekend, instead I always find comments about movies coming out NEXT weekend??

It's funny because you hope to read the reactions of the same people who were predicting numbers all week long, but i've noticed that they never appear. Instead of those, I only read more predictions. I think it just corresponds to be talking about what happened this weekend, not what will happen the next. For those kind of comments we have the Box Office Oracle, a topic that comes in the mid week, so please talk about the numbers that have just come out and wait for the topic I have just mentioned to make predictions!!

You know ther are alot of factors that palyed into HP 6's huge drop this week. For one I think G – Force coming out hurt it the most since parents wanted to take their kids to a movie that was actually KID friendly. Second demand already seemed to quickly die off after opening day and these Potter movies semmed to always be known for having huge openings, but dropping like rocks in the weeks ahead. Third was something that you said last week yourself Laremy. The mixed word of mouth among fans. Looking at some of the reactions there are quite a few fans who were upset with so many things in the movie not in the book and it just didn't live up to expectations for them. I think this also kind of proves my arguemnt that as much as you people don't wan't to believe Transformers is much more popular than HP at this moment. I mean I'm not a huge Transformers fan, but I'm not going to overlook that the second movie is still doing incredibly well at the B.O while being bashed to sh*t by mostly everybody. Hell it just knocked LOTR: ROTK out of the top ten of all time domestic and by Monday Star Wars : Episode 3 will be knocked out of the 9th spot. I just think that it's kind of amusing how Potter got a ton of positive reviews from critics and T2 got a ton of bad one's, but is still brining in MUCH more $.

Funny People – $32M
G-Force – $21M
Aliens in the Attic – $18M
Harry Potter 6 – $16M
The Ugly Truth – $15M

I thought G-Force would bomb. I love my kids, but a movie has to appeal to me a little bit to see a movie, and that just looked awful. I guess some parents love their kids more then me. Ugly Truth did about what I thought.

And Hurt Locker did not even make it to the large theaters in KC, only a couple of "art house" places. The AMC 30 is even showing movies like "Luck", "Moon" and "O'Horton".

And don't get your hopes too high for "500 Days of Night" Good movie or not, the two leads are not a draw at all.

I think the biggest reason for HP6's 61% decline is the low replay value of the film. Fans flocked to see their book's representation and didn't think too highly of it to return. Though many thought it a good depiction, you all know my views on the movie, it still isn't one where audiences would want to keep returning to see parts they want to watch again cause this movie is pretty bland in my view.

Funny people is not going to do as well because it's marketed as another knocked up but its more like punch drunk/40-year old virgin. I've heard it has some serious dramatic overtones. I await your review, Brad, if you're pulled from Comic Con long enuf that is.

Speaking of HP6, their budget is $250 mil reported on Boxofficemojo! Whoa! I haven't ever seen a budget that high…jeez. What would be the point at which they see profits then?

I think 'Aliens in the Attic' will attract to kids only, older kids will find that out if they mistakenly go see this. I've already heard a lot of people's disinterest in 'Aliens in the Attic'. I think 'Funny People' will win because of the cast and the fact that most people have seen 'The Hangover' already, therefore, most might be ready for a new comedy to check out.

1. Funny People- $26 million
2. G-Force- $23 million
3. Aliens in the Attic- $21 million
4. Harry Potter 6- $19 million
5. The Ugly Truth'- $15 million
6. Orphan'- $ 9 million
7. Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs'- $6.7 million
8. Transformers 2'- $6.2 million
9. The Hangover- $4.5 million
10.The Proposal- $4.0 million

It's evident that the Potter fanbase is not expanding at all, for HBP looks to finish in the same vicinity as Goblet and Phoenix. Also, what's hurting HBP is that a large number of Potter fans have seemingly dismissed HBP which hurts since they are the ones studios count on for repeat viewings.

Potter 6 has fallen behind the pace of OotP and it doesn't seem like it will catch up anymore even with IMAX (IMAX isn't gonna add something to it that will soothe the dismay of many potter-philes out there). The only thing keeping Potter 6 ahead right now is the midnight showings, and I expect OotP to make up that ground this next 2 weeks.

Damn it, I had a sinking feeling that Harry Potter 6 was going to drop over 60%, but I let myself believe that it wouldn't happen… oh, well. Funny People should take next weekend easily, due to good word of mouth, the drawing power of Adam Sandler, Seth Rogen and Judd Apatow, and the fact that there hasn't been a guy comedy since Bruno, which has already fallen off quickly. Harry Potter should fall less next weekend, due to the fact that it's gaining IMAX theaters and doesn't have any large competition. Early predictions:

1. Funny People- $29 million
2. G-Force- $20 million
3. The Ugly Truth- $18 million
4. Harry Potter 7- $17 million
5. Aliens In The Attic- $16 million
6. Orphan- $5.4 million
7. Ice Age 3- $5.2 million
8. The Hangover- $5 million
9. Transformers 2- $4.9 million
10. 500 Days of Summer- $4.8 million

I don't have numbers for you. I'm not a numbers kind of gal. But I wanted to say that a well done film to which parents can bring their children, in the summer no less, will always win.

Yes, "Funny People" will win next week. Even if it's inappropriate, they'll be alot of families there too. But comedies do well. I mean "Paul Blart: Mall Cop." Need I say more?

As for an explanation concerning the "The Ugly Truth," see title.

@Anonymous' Friend:

In spite of The Oracle's bizarre insistence that a film has to make something like 3 times its cost to break even, studios make their money from ticket prices (some of your bigger movies even receive a cut of the concession revenue, a much-hated turn of events started by George Lucas with the Star Wars prequels) and receive a percentage based on a staggered system starting with 80% of ticket prices the first two weeks, then it drops by 20% each level until they're getting about 20% by the time it reaches "dollar" theaters. The fact is the movie is already profitable when you take its worldwide grosses into account.

I think there were two problem that Harry Potter had. The first is that the die hard fans are going to rush out to see it opening week, if not opening day. This was proven by the midnight sales record. They want to be one of the first people to watch it. The second thing is that I've heard a lot of backlash from these fans because of how the movie was very different from the book, but I know that was gone over during one of the articles last week.

Now that the fans are pissed about how the movie went, they complain to the other people that go to watch the movie not caring about the book to movie transition. But if all they hear is that the movie is so bad, then why would they want to go and watch it. Yeah, HBP pulled in a crap load during its opening week because people wanted to see it right away. Bad word of mouth causes less people to watch it after that opening week. Another example, see Spider-Man 3, a movie that was so over the top hyped that when it finally came out and was despised by just about everyone, the drop from opening week to its second week was, I believe, somewhere in the high sixties/low seventies. People saw it, hated it, trashed it, little to very few people wanted to see it the next week. On the other hand we have movies like The Dark Knight and The Hangover. The Dark Knight pulls in a record amount of sales in record time while keeping at the same pace for the next couple of weeks because of the good word of mouth. If TDK had turned out to be Batman & Robin Part II, then we would have seen it bomb in the second week. The Hangover didn't necessarily draw in record numbers to begin with, but good word of mouth kept people going in weeks on end.

I'm not surprised about Harry Potter because I expected those who wanted to see it to see it opening day, which they did, and everyone else to wait and see how it was. Yes, people do like it, but I hear more negative than anything else, causing a much bigger drop in sales then the studio would have liked.

@malevolentmuse: THanks for that clearup. George Lucas has been a money hound ever since the first Star Wars. His movies progressively get worse. I heard he also gets all the $ for merchandise. The Oracle (Brad) has said that movies generally have to make 2.5 times their budget to go into profit mode. He's also said that some movies, like Monsters vs. Aliens will have to make their profits in DVD sales.

Then there's video games, books, and royalties I suppose. This industry can take care of itself no matter how much piracy there is in the world. You agree?

@Anonymous' Friend: Just to clear up one thing… I am not the Oracle, Laremy writes this column on a weekly basis and I am sure he will add to the discussion once he gets a chance… He too was covering Comic Con and has been busy.

@malevolentmuse: I'm not sure where "bizarre" is coming from, as you haven't a leg to stand on factually. Studios often released production budgets, and in the case of HP6 that number is $250m per BOM.com (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=harrypotter6.htm)

The that number comes directly off the bottom line. So $627m – $250m is the first step. Next up is theater.studio split which is negotiated differently for each and every film. Do you really think, with the frontloading of the entire system, that theaters allow WB to take 80% of opening week profits? The number generally is in the studios favor at around 60%, otherwise theaters would be going out of business. The advantage does shift back towards the theaters as weeks progress, yes, but I've never seen that 80% number you just mentioned. Anyhow, assume the number on Potter is 60.40, meaning $252m is going the theater's way. So now we're at $627-$252m-$250m. That would leave a profit of $125m… however it doesn't factor in marketing at all, which, for a film franchise like HP6, is at least $100m.

Studios have been counting more and more on the DVD for this exact ratio, the 2.5 – 3.0x percentage needed at the box office, which is why the window to DVD has dropped so significantly. It used to be six months before a film left theaters and made its way to DVD. Now that figure is closer to two months for most films. Studios DO clear 80% profit on DVDs, which is why they jazz them up with special features and packaging. In the case of Potter it can hope to sell a ton of DVDs, and it will end up profitable. But it's a tentpole film, it's supposed to carry the water for dozens of other titles (including Oscar films) that don't make huge dollars. Which is why WB can't be pleased. When a franchise is trending down it's generally not a reason to celebrate.

There's a reason when a guy like Peter Jackson can't get a film like Halo made. Does anyone think it wouldn't make $300m worldwide cume on a budget of $150m? Of course it would… but that's not enough to make any money with. If a studio greenlights a $200m project they need it hitting $500m – $600m theatrically. It's not a number I've made up, it's a number I've been told by distributors and studios alike.

@Laremy: What an education! Thank you.

Aliens in the attic and G-Force will not exceed expectations, how can you expect high dollars for 2 family movies?

I say for no kids, Funny People, with kids, Funny People or AITA, if the kids want something else, then go to G-Force.

Harry will not drop more than 50% next week

Re Harry Potter and fan repeat business. I went to see Spiderman 2 three of four times, Hannah Montana: the Movie twice,Titanic two or three times; but, I've always assumed that business from repeat customers was a very small percentage of sales (2-3% more gross just to make a totally uneducated, unsubstantiated guess.) Has anyone ever heard any numbers on repeat business? I think I'll ask around at work.

Harry Potter lost to Twilight at the last Kid's Choice Awards. I still hesitate to bring it up because we can't be sure what it means or if it means anything at all. It could be, though, that kids are looking for something new; that Harry Potter is becoming like the James Bond franchise.

@Laremy: Thanks for that too. I think I understand the movie industry and profits now…for the most part. What about royalties, merchandising and video games? Where do they fit in and who gets the shares of those profits?

Next week, the game gets interesting to predict because most of Sandler's comedies open north of the mid-$30m range but they are ALWAYS PG-13. Still $35 million can't seem too far out of range for the R-rated Funny People, right?

The brand that is Apatow's name is growing (okay, forget Year One), it's got Sandler AND Rogen (and Hill, etc.), we're well into summer and the 17+ demographic is hungry for another R-rated comedy to follow up The Hangover (after Bruno didn't deliver).

Its obstacles: what seems to be a more dramatic approach (for those looking for a full out comedy) and a supposed 2 and a half hour runtime (potentially cutting down on showtimes per day). Not only that, if WOM is good for The Ugly Truth, 17+ females are gonna drag their boyfriends/husbands to the R-rated romantic comedy instead (and perhaps wait on Funny People/WOM).

Still, audiences and critics loved Virgin and Knocked Up (excellent reviews & excellent word of mouth). If Step Brothers could open to $30m this time last year (under Apatow as producer & mixed reviews), I can definitely see Funny People in the same ballpark. In the end though, its success will probably rely on WOM.

@Anonymous' Friend: It's an individual thing for each movie. So Hasbro will bank something off of G.I. Joe – be it up-front rights, back-end profits, and of course toys.

For the Potter series I know that Rowling has one of the most lucrative contracts in the business, another item coming off of WB's bottom line. As she's the creator of the characters I'm not sure where they would profit on merchandise. Perhaps official posters and t-shirts?

Marvel is also retaining more and more on the rights front now that the films are established. It used to be studios were doing the creators a favor by making a film out of their comic. But comic book companies have gotten very wise and profit far more off of movies than they use to. It's the very reason Marvel is now going it alone on the production side – they think they can do it better without studio overhead.

"The proposal" it's an amazing success !!
Harry potter will earn 290 millons at de USA box office

Can't believe I got the rankings correct. I just whiffed on a lot of actual dollar numbers. That's why I'm no oracle, just a guy with a keyboard.

Harry Potter is definitely on the way down, but I wonder what the next two films will do. After all, these are the final movies, will it score higher than the previous Potters? And how much longer do you think this 3-D trend is going to be popular? I think that with Halloween 2 and The Final Destination opening on the same day, Destination will win the weekend due to the 3-D gimmick, while Halloween 2 will suffer from it.

Next week, Funny People is the clear winner, but Aliens in the Attic reminds too much of those bad 80's alien family movies like Mac and Me and Spaced Invaders, and the marketing seems pretty minimal. I see G-Force losing less than 40% next weekend.

@Laremy:
A lot of the breakdown that you are talking about makes sense. I have heard that studios tend to split the profits up as much as possible so that they don't show a huge profit on their films. In fact, on paper, they want to appear they've lost money on the books so they don't have to pay out huge point deals. Is that true? I remember hearing about creative accounting practices on studios when the guy who wrote While You Were Sleeping tried to sue Disney for not paying him but Disney showed that the film actually lost money despite being a substantial hit. I've never been able to figure that out since how do studios make money? Do you know anything about that?

Next weekend…

1. Aliens in the Attic: 126.6m
2. Funny People: 31.3m
3. G-Force: 20.5m
4. Harry Potter: 16.2m
5. The Ugly Truth: 15.8m

@Gophers Attack!: Good one.

@The Check Spot: Yeah, the accounting is amazing given we're largely talking about publicly traded companies. My understanding is that it's essentially impossible to tell whether or not a film was profitable using studio numbers. Peter Jackson found this out the hard way with New Line – when the Lotr's were making billions and yet somehow his back end cut wasn't adding up. My guess is the way they do it is by shifting everything around where the deals call for a percentage of profits (this would probably not be the case on a film like The Hangover where no one would be big enough to get back-end).

But on back-end deals they can simply pump up the marketing, hire consultants for the sequels, take everyone out to lunch to celebrate, hire three new admin assistants to handle the fan mail, set aside extra for the DVD (which the person won't have back-end on) – my guess is there is a way to build up infrastructure using profits on the hits, which again only come every third or fourth film. This is why the bigger guys get huge up fronts instead these days, if you're Tom Cruise or Jim Carrey you take your $20m up front and forget about the back end. It's too murky in there to figure anything out unless you had a forensic accounting team on the case. And do you really want to sue the company you just had a huge hit with? So actors/directors throw up their hands and make sure not to take back-end the next time… and the studio is then freed up to account however they like.

The last Harry Potter film made two hundred million in DVD sales. Plus, there's the rentals, TV rights, and merchandising rights. Increasingly, these revenue streams can be gathered worldwide.

Is it just me or are the quotes for movie production costs inflated. I keep hearing estimates or numbers for production costs that get revised upwards. I originally heard Harry Potter cost $200 million to make. Now we're hearing $250 million. Are the studios doing this on purpose as part of their Hollywood accounting or is there some kind of bias in the estimates like when opening weekend numbers get revised a little downward?