Image Credit: Karen BallardFifteen million dollars may get you a box office win this depressed weekend of moviegoing. The Expendables and Vampires Suck are competing for the No. 1 slot this frame, with Sly Stallone’s action mash-up earning an estimated $4.95 million on Friday while the Twilight spoof Vampires Suck, which bowed on Wednesday, added another $4 million to its coffers. Who will take the weekend? The edge goes to the ’80s action geezer, as Vampires Suck will like drop off over the three days. (Not that the studio is complaining: Vampires has already grossed $6.3 million heading into its first weekend in theaters, so the low budget spoof is likely to be profitable.)
The rest of the top five is a hodge podge of holdovers and new releases. Eat Pray Love took in another $3.6 million Friday, setting it up for a $12-million weekend. (That figure represents a 47-percent drop-off for its sophomore session.) Lottery Ticket is likely to land in the fourth slot. The urban comedy starring Bow Wow took in a little under $4 million on Friday for a weekend that could hit $11 million. And The Other Guys should round out the top five. The Will Ferrell, Mark Wahlberg comedy-actioner took in an estimated $3 million on Friday for a weekend that will likely end up at $10 million.
The week’s remaining new releases will have a hard time cracking the top five. Piranha 3-D took in an estimated $3.5 million on Friday while Nanny McPhee Returns grossed just under $3 million. The Switch, starring Jennifer Aniston and Jason Bateman, also took in less than $3 million. It seems unlikely that any of these films will be able to eke out a double-digit opening. Check back tomorrow for a full report.
The fact that Vampires Suck is even in the top 5 is proof that people are tasteless, braindead, morons.
Extremely depressing. I’m all for a quality spoof film, but Friedberg and Seltzer are quite possibly the worse filmmakers working today. And that includes Uwe Boll and Tommy Wiseau.
Usually even the worst of these kind of “genre parody” comedies can come up with a couple half-amusing moments for the commercials. “Vampires Suck” couldn’t even manage that. I too am amazed that people are actually spending good money for tickets to this thing. If any silly movie were to debut at number one this weekend, I thought the 3-D “Piranha” flick had the best chance; at least that might have some funny/scary moments with stuff coming out of the screen at you, and horror films usually have good openings anyway. People would rather sit through that vampire garbage? I heard it already has a record low score on RottenTomatoes.
Even The Switch deserved to make more money! I was actually expecting Nanny McPhee Returns to take the weekend!
Very true and I hate these guys, but I would rather sit through this movie than any of the Twilight movies.
Nothing could make me any Twilight movie. Its crazy that vampires suck had better acting actors than the twilight movie series
Yeah, right! I would pick Twilight over that vampire insult movie any day!
@m1. Well, why care replying?
It could have been worse. Scott Pilgrim could have surged and take the top spot, miraculously. Thank God audiences ignored that crappy hipster-on-steroids crap, with one-trick-pony Cera and his patented “awkward nerdy kid” schtick
Sweetie, check out the reviews. Scott Pilgrim blows the rest of those guys out of the water, most say it’s one of the best movies of the summer.
Seriously, you don’t have to like Scott Pilgrim, but to compare it to Vampires Suck? That’s just insulting.
If a movie opens and nobody sees it, is it really a movie? I’ve heard legends and rumors of a movie called Scott Puritan or something, but no one has actually seen it. So I will have to assume it’s an urban myth, like somebody’s friend’s cousin saw it and loved it.
When movie has a crappy actor in the lead, and the most interesting thing in the trailers is the ugly girl’s hair changing color; it’s not even worth watching on cable.
You are all idiots. Go watch Paul Blart. It’s more your speed. Scott Pilgrim rules.
It pleases me so much that Scott Pilgrim bombed. I couldn’t understand the hype, it just looked incredibly stupid. Not only was the plot ridiculous, but the female lead is just homely – why would any guy fight for her? Thank god there is no danger of a Scott Pilgrim 2.
Have any of you guys that are trashing “Scott Pilgrim” even seen the movie?
Wow you people are pathetic. It’s perfectly fine if a movie isn’t for you, but to express so much joy over the fact that Scott Pilgrim isn’t performing well is pretty much the most childish thing ever. No one is forcing you to watch the movie. So instead of needlessly bashing something you haven’t seen, how about you just go about your day?
oh and I’m seriously laughing at the comments saying the lead girl is homely/ugly looking. Do yourself a favor and google Mary Elizabeth Winstead to see what she actually looks like w/o the colored hair.
Poor Scott Pilgrim. It deserves so much better than all your scorn, especially those of you who HAVEN’T EVEN SEEN IT and don’t know what the heck you’re talking about. I thought it was a hysterical movie, and everyone who was in theater was laughing their a$% off. And yes, it has been fairly well-reviewed. It just didn’t find it’s audience. It will end up being more of a revered cult movie, much like some of director Edgar Wright’s other much loved films i.e. Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz.
Actually, I saw SCOTT PILGRIM this afternoon and laughed my ass off. It may not be for everyone, but those of you who are trashing it because you don’t like the ‘look’ of the actors sound pretty moronic.
Hey, Scott Pilgrim looks like a stupid movie, no question about that. But I have to defend the honor of Mary Elizabeth Winstead, she is super hot!
Scott Pilgrim was awesome, and I’m not much of a Michael Cera fan, nor am I anything close to being a hipster. You missed out on a hilarious movie.
Why is the assumption that anyone who criticizes Scott Pilgrim didn’t see it? I went into Scott Pilgrim wanting to like it, and was under-impressed. There were a few clever moments and I was OK with the graphic novel/video game feel of the movie, but at some point you set aside the CGI and have to like or care about the characters, and I just find myself tired of Michael Cera’s schtick. He’s insecure and awkward, but the girl who’s way out of his league thinks it’s cute… we get it already.
Vampires Suck is depressing, because Twilight is ripe for parody and the actress playing the Bella character does a spot-on Kristen Stewart impression. Anyone with actual talent could’ve hammered out a great parody, but sadly we get a movie by the guys who made “Meet the Spartans.”
I have to agree. The Twilight movies, while not exceptional, are somewhat solid entertainment. I would like to see a parody that works. Though I do respect the shovel to the head and Jersey Shore insults shown in the trailer.
No, the Twilight movies are far less than “solid” entertainment. It’s probably fitting, actually, that those terrible movies get an abysmal parody.
@thin: Not at all.
WHo cares to see it? Universal spent another ton of money on a movie that only people on EW would ever want to see. Cera was good in Superbad, then he became like the guy from napolean dynamite.
Who want to have some fun…oh thats why they went out in the first place, for some hopeful entertainment!
It’s time for Jennifer aniston to give up her movie career and find a good sitcom to attach herself to. I love her and it breaks my heart to see this stream of box office failures.
or she needs to pick something thats not a rom com
how bout a normal comedy or even a well written rom com or dramedy
When Jennifer Aniston takes parts in small films like “The Good Girl” or “Office Space,” she makes her characters memorable, but other than that, it seems she’s just doing rom-com variations on Rachel from “Friends,” hoping one of them becomes a big hit. She seriously needs to stretch as an actress and take some parts where she really plays against type. She wouldn’t just be thought of as a haircut, or Brad Pitt’s ex, anymore!
The Switch is not her worst movie, it isn’t really a Rom Com either. It was more of a film about Jason Bateman’s character’s journey than anything else.
The Switch didn’t really have a shot, it was misrepresented by Miramax who couldn’t really afford to distribute or promote it.
With better marketing it would have done a lot better than The Bounty Hunter, it was certainly a much better film
I don’t agree about promotion. I started seeing ads for this film last month and Anniston has been on TV everyday this week, so, this film got more than Lottery Ticket or Nanny McPhee combined. Now all of a sudden it is Bateman’s movie when he did very little promotion for it. Bad premise, and apparently, a bad script.
i’ve seen a constant stream of TV ads for the switch and considering how much press she gets in the gossip columns/websites, it should have opened better.
Hmmm well I didn’t see many ads for it, and what few ads I did see billed it as a Rom Com without anything showing that the film was really about Bateman’s character and his son.
Bad marketing, pitting it as Aniston’s movie and making it seem like it was all about the romance which, as I said, it wasn’t.
The film was actually surprisingly sweet, the scenes with Bateman and his character’s son easily being the best of the film.
While certainly not the greatest film out right now, it is much better than Aniston’s earlier film The BOunty Hunter and probably would have made more money if it’d had better marketing and better distribution.
Its true I do love movies about sperm
gossip sites and media attention do not equal major box-office openings. and either way, the only star attached to it was jennifer aniston. jason bateman is not big movie male lead in the least yet. and above all, a limited release impacts everything.
I’m definitely going to see it on DVD. It looks like something different.
box-office failures? whether critics and whoever liked them or not, all her recent major films like the bounty hunter, he’s just not that into you, marley & me, the break-up were all successes. only love happens had a weak gross, but even that managed to make more than it’s budget. and the switch only opened in 2,000 theaters. not even a major release. so obviously it wasn’t going to draw in big money.
Exactly what I keep saying with distribution, Miramax didn’t put it in wide release with less than 2,000 theatres.
Lottery Ticket had 1973 theatres and Switch had 2012. So, why did a film that many people never heard of make more money on fewer screens?
Those movies that opened big all have one thing in common: The fact they had popular leading men, or a very large cast or based on a very popular book with a cute dog.
All movies where Aniston carries it on her own, Fail & bomb. She simply cannot open a movie by herself.
I saw endless promotion for this movie: commercials, Aniston did several talk shows, magazines etc. her fans need to stop making excuses for her failed movies.
@Give me a break. SO true! Her fans always come up with excuses for her box office failures. It wasn’t her movie, no one knew it was coming out, it wasn’t released in enough theatre, etc. When a movie does well (Bruce Almighty, Marley and Me, etc) it’s HER FILM (nevermind the Jim Carrey, the cute dog, the popular book). But when a film does poorly (The Switch, Love Happens, Management, etc), it’s NOT her film, not her fault. It’s ridiculous. She can’t open a film by herself. She’s NOT Julia Roberts. She’s not Sandra Bullock. She is a mediocre tv actress who has yet to prove she is a box office draw.
Aniston needs to pick better roles!!She can always join “The Expendables 2″ and be guaranteed a hit while re-inventing her image. Go Sly Go! “The Expendables” #1.
Seriously, Vampire Suck looks like one of the worst spoof movies ever made. I can’t believe people are wasting their money on it. Sure, I’m all for going to a silly movie sometimes, but as long as its still funny. Not one part of the trailers for Vampires Suck even deserves a giggle. And I’m betting the funniest parts of the movie are shown in the trailers. And the TV ads for the movie that proclaim some of the “reviews” from critics like “Hugh Jass” and “Ivana Tinkle”…seriously? How old are the people who made this movie? Did they think that was edgy and hilarious? Kids used to make those jokes in 3rd grade.
You are SO right! I would personally like to see a spoof honoring Oscar nominees over the years. But after seeing how badly they turn out, I think the spoof would just end up insulting those films.
hahahaha! Hugh Jass and Ivana Tinkle! hahahahahah *giggle giggle*
You’ve obviously never seen “Meet the Spartans”. That movie sucked hard. Vampires Suck is actually tasteful in comparison.
And for the record, the guys that maked the movie do show the funniest parts in the trailers. 5 minutes of humor and about 70 minutes of useless filler. The same tactic Glenn Beck uses actually.
i love how people think Jennifer Aniston is a failure. Perhaps they should be reminded The Bounty Hunter made over 100 million dollars as did he’s just not that into you and marley and me made over 200 million.Also her feilm with adam sandler and nicole kidman is likely to make a lot of money. Stop the hating.
She is a failure! All movies that she carries herself bomb. Love Happens, Management, Rumor has it, Derailed…Shall I go on? She cannot open a movie big with just her name. She is not a movie star.
Bounty Hunter made less than 70m domestically, made less than Butler’s movie with Katherine Heigl, HJNTIY was based on a popular book plus had a HUGE cast!! Similar to Valentine’s Day.
Marley & me…Also a popular book, plus was a family movie at Christmas time with a cute dog. Every poster for that movie I saw had only the Dog, no jennifer, & the commercials focused on the DOG.
Her Adam Sandler movie will likely make $, but b/c of Adam. He has proven that he can open movies with only his name.
Bounty Hunter made $100 when you add in international, but did less that $70 mil domestically, again with a major male lead and the other film was a film with lots of other actors, and she was not top billed. The one coming up has two major stars in it, again, not her movie alone and Sandler is the draw for the new one. Anniston is not, for the most part a draw and her name alone cannot open a film, though few stars can these days, she definetly cannot.
is $70 million supposed to be weak? it opened with 20. so to make more than 3 times it’s opening, it had some legs. and the budget was only 40. and then add the other 70 from international. and no, i wouldn’t count gerard butler as a major male lead. he only became famous after 300 (and the big thing there was the look and effects of the film) and only has had 2 other major successes since then and bounty hunter (the ugly truth & law-abiding citizen). anniston is definitely a draw. people love her, no matter what anyone says about her same roles and blah blah.
Well these people that love her, don’t love her enough to pay for her movies. I saw a tweet from an interviewer at her premier & he said only about 20 people came. 20!!!!!! So pathetic.
If she was a draw, her movie would have made more.
And Gerard’s The Ugly Truth did better than the Bounty Hunter…so yes he is a fairly big star.
It’s sad for me to say this but hell I’d rather watch Twilight than Vampire Sucks. At least Twilight doesn’t have commercials with fake reviews with names “Takeher Clothesoff”. Seriously, that people go to see this 3rd grade humor crap is just….incredibly pathetic.
Yes! I’d rather my money went to the insufferable Twilight movies than another one of these hideous, senseless, thuroughly unfunny “Movie” movies.
Twilight isn’t that bad. Some of you people act like they are the worst films ever. But that vampire insult movie (I will be using that name to refer to Vampires Suck from now on) deserves to bomb.
I think this goes on record as the WORST SUMMER MOVIE SEASON EVER. (Save for Toy Story 3)
And most disappointing. Salt, The Switch, and Iron Man 2 didn’t get the great reviews I was expecting.
huh? maybe I’m remembering it incorrectly, but I thought Iron Man 2 got quite decent reviews. I know I loved it…
and Koobie, what about Inception? Amazing movie right there.
So let me get this straight, nobody will go see Scott Pilgrim, a fresh, original movie yet will pay good money to go see Vampires Suck? If you bought a ticket to go see Vampires Suck, you disgust me.
At least Scott Pilgrim will reach success on DVD. But I’m starting to regret that ticket I bought back in April for Date Night. Not that it was too bad of a movie.
Vampires Suck has been out on torrent sites for weeks, why would anyone go PAY to see that pile of dog $h!t lol Expendables all the way
I can’t believe people are actually seeing Vampires Suck. What is wrong with you?
Don’t count Scott Pilgrim out yet. I am also rooting for Piranha 3D, will see it on Sunday.
What DO people see in Aniston? She’s not pretty and has a limited range. Do people still feel sorry for her?
Must be a lot of Friends’ fans and they just want to see “Rachel” in the movies…which is pretty much all they are. She’s a one-act pony.
Rachel in The Switch looks like a bomb in the making.
I think Vampires Suck is doing well because its PG-13. The high schoolers can get in to see and its spoofs a genre they are in to.
Very true. But so is Scott Pilgrim, and that movie is about AND for them. Try again.
A win is a win. “The Expendables” have kicked of Ashton Kutcher’s “Killers” (no surprise); it’s also creeping up on “Dinner for Schmucks”, “The A-Team”, “Knight and Day”, and has crushed “The Sorcerer’s Apprentice, while holding off Julia Roberts EPL and Aniston’s “The Switch”. Not bad at all. As for the other films, they’ll be out of the top ten by next week. The so-called, “action geezer” (how rude Nicole),is still rockin’ and deserves RESPECT!
ha,ha, suck it vampires! It took Sly to put the end to the domination of this annoying fad at least for this weekend but where there is one victory, no matter how small it is, there will be another. Expendables saved the boxoffice and that deserves even more RESPECT!