Image Credit: Patti PerretThe Last Exorcism topped Takers on Friday night with approximately $9 million from moviegoers seeking a good scare. The Pg-13 rated horror flick from producer Eli Roth and Lionsgate is now on track for a weekend gross of north of $20 million. (That’s not bad for a weekend where tracking suggested the winner wouldn’t walk away with much more than $15 million.) The urban crime drama Takers didn’t have a bad showing either on Friday. With around $7 million earned its opening day, the Screen Gems release starring Paul Walker, Idris Elba and Chris Brown could also generate a weekend take of over $20 million. It’s unclear which film will walk away with top weekend honors. (To come in first, Exorcism would have to hold off a steep drop, which often happens with horror flicks.)
The re-release of Avatar doesn’t seem to be having a huge impact on the marketplace. Bowing in some 800 theaters, the 3-D flick grossed a bit over $1 million on Friday for a tenth place showing. Its weekend take could add up to around $4 million for the frame, pushing Avatar‘s total domestic gross to north of $750 million.
The rest of the top five is being dominated by holdovers. The Expendables earned just under $3 million, while Eat Pray Love grossed around $2 million and The Other Guys earned just under $2 million. If the weekend holds as predicted, Expendables should gross another $9 million its third weekend in release, while Eat Pray Love will earn $7 million and Other Guys should gross just over $6 million. Stay tuned for full results tomorrow.
Must say that is a good first day. No one had either of these movies making more than 15 mil this weekend.
And the last exorcism cost $2 mil to make, not sure.
All I can say is: Great news for Lionsgate Films! They needed a hit badly and they got 2: “The Expendables” and “The Last Exorcism”.
EW predicted Takers to only take in 7 million because they thought no one would go see a movie with blacks in it. They where wrong.
Or maybe they felt no one would go see a movie that had limited press and looks like crap.
True. But blacks always support black films, even if it’s crappy. I know I do!
“Blacks always support black films, even if it’s crappy.”
Apparently they choose their films the same way they vote for Presidents.
You ppl are beyond ignorant! Takers is a good film with a solid cast comprised of African-American, Latinos, Asians & Caucasians. And for the fool talking about the president, there was a large percentage of Caucasians who voted for President Obama as there have been large numbers of African-American’s that have voted for the previous Caucasian presidents! Jackass!
and the last movie with fishbourne, and the other movie next day air or whatever and and and, you racist jerk.This does look more polished than armored and that other movie though.
or maybe some people are just supportive of stupid unrealistic movies like that avatar or whatever like it or not anybody with common sense will go see a film if they like the previews no matter who’s playing in it a white actor or a black one wake up and get a clue.
Well, it’s good to see an integrated cast. The military is nearly 40% minority, so having all one race is getting to be unrealistic.
why are you lying, they predicted that takers would win the weekend idiot.
Dave what are you talking about? They predicted “Takers” would be the number one movie this weekend! And the 7 million comes from what they reported it made in the first day.
See what racism will get you? I am not African-American and I went to see “Takers” just because of the way the media coverage had been skewed. It was a very good, action packed film! Me and my buddies all agreed that we were glad we went. I don’t really trust any review that focuses on 1st night movie sells! I thought you calculated the entire weekend or have you already done that? I guess we can already predict what Entertainment Weekly will say about “Takers” on Monday! “It didn’t do well so the youngest member of the cast, Chris Brown..blah, blah”…is totally responsible for that! Whatever!
I saw takers and it was awesome from beginning to end! action packed and the handsome cast was an added bonus.
Is that you, Hayden?
Takers will end at #1 anyway. Action movie and Eye Candies are the perfect recipe.
why in the world would anybody want to see avatar AGAIN? or for the first time? it was the longesttt movie i’ve ever seen and it really wasn’t GREAT. all the hype made people think it was the best but IT WASN’T and re-releasing it is a ballsy move. but anyways, i’m going to go watch Takers this afternoon and i can’t wait with all those GORGEOUS men.
get a bf hooka
Hypocrite much? You saw it once already, why make fun of people seeing it for their first time?
I saw Avatar on Friday after watching the DVD (did not want to see the first time around due to all the hype). Once I did see the DVD, all I wanted to do is see it with all the 3D effects. Loved even more the second time around – thanks for bringing it back in the theatres!
You know that they re-released Avatar just to get over the $750 million dollar mark.That way Cameron can tell us all how it made three quarters of a billion dollars.I can see his head getting bigger already.
Not only is that true, but it sounds like the worst Dr. Suess story ever. “…and his head grew three sizes that day.”
I’d like to know how well they that Avatar would do in its re-release … is this above expectations? Below? This may be a stupid question, but does it cost a lot of money to re-release a movie after 8 months?
There are marketing cost but I don’t think it’s that much considering the promotion was done on a lower scale. Since Avatar is already out on DVD and only a few months have passed since it left theaters, I think it did okay but I’m no expert. I kind of agree with Bobby that release may have been more about ego in crossing the $750 mark, so a loss won’t be too bad as long as they offically cross it.
I don’t know why people underestimated these films so much. “The Last Exorcism” has been advertised heavily for months and is really the only true horror movie out right now (I loved “Piranha 3D” but I consider it much more of a comedy). As for “Takers”, that’s also been advertised heavily in recent weeks and has a big-name cast to boost audiences. I expected both films to open to $20 million or more, and it looks like I’ll be right.
How can you have a PG-13 rated “horror” film? Horror films need R ratings!
Who says horror films need R ratings?
I don’t expect a PG-13 horror film to be terrifying if it’s safe for a 13 year old to watch.
Poltergeist is PG. wrap you head around that one.
Rekcuf Yeh what’s your problem buddy, please no politics…Bush II was the worst. Takers is a very good movie…unless you never heard of “Heat”.
Why did he re-release Avatar! There was no point if you want re-release something make it a good old movie not one that came out a year ago!
Less than a year ago!
So how’s Scott Pilgrim doing. It continues to please me that this was such a huge bomb. All that ridiculous hype and it amounted to nothing.
moonraker1000 dude scott pilgrim was awesome!!! you suck! plus i bet you like eat pray and suck! you dont know what a good movie is
f*ck scott pilgrim and the gay white dudes who go see it.
In the long run it’ll have more impact than Takers or the Last Exorcism. Hyped or not, the movie was actually *good.* That’s all that matters.
PG-13 might have been an appropriate rating, it’s never good to see a group of little ones coming out of a horror movie scared, parents ……….
Takers is no Heat. Now that I’ve seen both I can vouch for that. Lack of character development is the biggest knock for me in Takers, we learn next to zero about half the cast. Maybe they should have done less action and mixed in more dialogue scenes to explain and define the characters a bit more. They seemed rather one sided, and Matt Dillon is so past his prime it’s not even funny.
T.I shouldn’t have had to do much study for his role…a former convict getting out of prison.
Personally, I wasn’t in agreement with EW’s predictions on the box office, as I have seen ads for Exorcism everywhere. How a movie advertised so low (in my opinion; I’m no expert, but when I rarely see the trailer for it, I think that’s a low level of marketing) like Takers beating Exorcism seemed inaccurate. Sure, there’s been times where a movie like Takers could win, but when the plot was that weak (looked a lot like Armoured) compared to one that is very relevant presently (shot Paranormal Activity style), it didn’t surprise me at all to see that Exorcism won the day (haven’t seen it yet, but plan to; been a lot of positive buzz revolving around this little project. Now, in regards to Avatar, I’m happy to see it back; then again, though, I’m a hard-core Avatar fan, an Avatard. I’ve seen it already 5 times in the theaters (6 if you count when I went Friday night), and countless times on DVD. I freaking love that movie. When I went at a 7 PM showing, it was pretty packed (for a movie that can be seen on so many other mediums than at the theater; shows how many people still want to see this juggarnaut at the theaters in 3D, the way it was supposed to be experienced). For Friday, estimates point it had a $1500/theater average, very impressive for a movie that everyone has already seen (at least, those who wanted to see it have already done so). I thought that the additional footage was great and it wasn’t stupid material; it added more story to it, and I enjoyed it throughly. I don’t know how good it will do in this small release, but, again, it doesn’t really matter. On a worldwide level, Avatar hasn’t just become the biggest movie of all time (even with inflation), but it has changed the ways movies are made, and that’s considerably more important than making a couple more million (as if Cameron needed it; the man already took north of $200 million as his salary last year). Anyway, I think Exorcism will win the weekend, with Takers being second…
So let me guess, you base quality off of one’s ability to kick off their marketing magic? Really? How stupid. Marketing is not what makes a good movie. The movie is what makes a good movie. You marketing people (and followers) can really be about bunch of crap. Let the product sell itself.
Marketing doesn’t make a good movie, but it’s important for getting an audience to show up. If you care about the box office numbers, then marketing is important. Scott Pilgrim as a great movie with lousy marketing. Takers was a terrible movie with good marketing.
I wanted to see Takers because of Paul Walker. But then I heard woman-beater Chris Brown is in it and there’s no way I’ll give any money to further that piece of crap’s career.
I see your one of those closet people who choses Eminem because they didn’t show you his wife Kim’s face after he beat her right. You really need to get over someone else life and understand were all human. Chris is a good person trying to put the pieces of his life back together. Give him break already. I know you would want the same.
Get the facts straight, even though you wanted it to be so, doesn’t make it so. If you report box office, get it right and be truthful. Takers was weekend #1!