Box Office Update: Still Coming Up Short

<-- a sure fire way to get your kid pummeled this Halloween (most likely by kids dressed as pirates). In case you haven't noticed, we've switched to doing these updates every couple of weeks now because, well constantly updating you every week on this film's box office shortcomings has gotten a bit boring. Singerman's 13th weekend at the domestic box office is in the books, and like most of the 12 before it, it left a lot to be desired. Singerman continued its slow painful crawl to its demise by grossing a whopping $301,373. The vast majority of that coming from the 100 or so IMAX theaters it's still sitting in per a contractual agreement. This takes Singerman's disappointing domestic gross total to just $198,447,055.

How does that stack up to your favorite piece of comparative cinema, Batman Begins? Well in Begins 13th domestic weekend last year it took in $440,469 or approximately 32% more. That took Begins total domestic gross up to $204,145,879 at the time, which is about 2.8% more than where Singerman is at right now.

Another interesting tidbit, is that Begins total domestic theatrical run was about 20 weeks. From the end of it's 13th weekend until the end of it's theatrical run it only took in another $1,197,895. Assuming Singerman could get back to the level where it's making the same each weekend as Begins, (instead of trailing behind by about 32%) it still would fall short of the $200 million mark domestic, the alleged "make or break point," with a total gross of $199,644,950. Assuming Singerman stays 32% behind Begins income level, it would end up at around $199,261,623. Another thing to consider is that Begins 13th weekend was in early September as opposed to late September like Singerman, so it's going to be even harder to make up those numbers for Singerman now that we're getting into October, and the summer film season has long since ended.

Singerman Can Ruin Your Relationship

Apparently, Superman and Lois Lane's relationship wasn't the only one ruined by Singerman.

In an odd twist of irony, Kate Bosworth is apparently blaming the failure of her real life relationsip with POTC2 star, Orlando Bloom, on the film where she failed at portraying a convincing relationship with Brandon Routh.

According to 24Dash.com, Bosworth is blaming the alleged "Superman curse" on her split with Bloom.

Kate has now confided in friends that she and Orlando decided to go
their separate ways because the stress of being apart while she was promoting 'Superman Returns', in which she plays Lois Lane, was too much for them. A friend of the actress is quoted by Britain's Daily Express newspaper as saying: "The stress of Kate filming and then promoting 'Superman Returns' was too much for her - especially with Orlando being so busy with 'Pirates of the Caribbean' at the same time.

"It's something they had suffered before in their relationship before but Superman was the one that broke them up. Kate never believed in the curse before - but she does now."

After her last "musings," we didnt think Bosworth could get any crazier, but perhaps she's more like Margot Kidder then we first thought?

Sam Raimi won't make Singer's Mistakes

Well at least one of them.

Apparently Sam Raimi isn't taking any chances with his successful Spider-man franchise, and unlike Bryan Singer, he has the ability to push his own ego aside to make a better movie.

After hearing numerous justified complaints about how Singerman lacked any real "punch," including WB Chief Alan Horn basically admitting it as a reason for his film's subpar box office results, Raimi is apparently reshooting parts of the upcoming Spider-man 3 movie to include more action scenes, so unlike with Singerman, young males will actually have a desire to see his film and not snicker to themselves and question the hero's manhood.

Imagine that? A director who doesn't let his past successes go to his head, and is willing to change his game plan to give the fans more of what they want. What a novel concept.

Fun with an IMDb Template

Apparently, idle hands and an IMDb template are a comedy goldmine. For those of you who think we have too much free time on our hands, check out the fun that the folks over at Daily Ramblings had with an IMDb template and The Story that Just Won't Go Away.
Could we have gotten a more perfect cast than Eric McCormack, Nathan Lane, and Kathy Griffin? I think not.

Pirates Scribe and Singerman VFX Coordinator Poke Holes in the Film and the Crew

Thanks to all the readers who pointed this piece out to us. We waited to post it for a while because we wanted to verify that the two individuals were who they say they were. After a bit of checking, we've found that this is in fact legit.

Recently on his own Wordplayer website, Hollywood scribe Terry Rosio, gave his thoughts, from a writer's standpoint, on Singerman. Who is Terry Rosio? And why should we care what he thinks, you ask? Well Terry's written a few "somewhat successful" films like Pirates of the Caribbean 1 & 2, and this film called Shrek, that we heard made a few dollars. So whenever a guy who's written a film that's made over a BILLION dollars worldwide speaks up, it's probably a good idea to listen.
Terry takes the writing in Singerman to task in a number of areas including a few that we've been hammering at for months. He also provides some great insight in a number of other areas like this:

From what I could see, there were two ideas presented in the film -- 1.) hey Superman, guess what, while you were away, turns out you've made a kid. And 2.) Lex Luthor is free because you didn't show up to court.

So what is Superman's position on these topics? Wish I knew, because here's a surprise -- neither of these issues is discussed in the film either.

Superman does not say a word -- and I'm serious, this is a true statement -- Superman does not say a word about having a son. (Well, unless you count the deadbeat dad response, "I'll be around." Yikes!)

And Superman does not say a word about the issue of being responsible for Lex Luther being free. He does not defend his action, he does not regret it, he does not discuss it. At all.

Okay, okay ... let's cast around for something. The film has to explore some kind of topic, right? Yes! They DO talk, a little bit, about this issue: Does the World Need Superman?

With nothing else going on, that's the subject of Lois' essay. That's the purpose of the flight up into the sky. So there should be some juicy stuff there, right?

Okay, let's lay out the arguments.

YES, the world need Superman because he resuces Space Shuttles and saves people from explosions and there is a lot of human pain and suffering out there.

NO, the world doens't need Superman because ... because ...

Guess what, filmmakers. You picked an issue that has only one side. Poor Lois was assigned the position -- via an insert shot -- that the world does not need Superman. Why? We don't know, and we can never know, because ... there isn't anything you can put on the other side of the argument.

There you go. Right from the mouth of someone who writes for a living. Like we've been saying all along Singerman presents a myriad of ideas but fails to explore any of them effectively. I HIGHLY recommend reading the entirety of Terry's post. It's long but his insight into the topic is fantastic.

What became even more interesting was that later on in that very same thread, one of the VFX Production Coordinators, from SINGERMAN chimed in on the topic, and his revelations about Singer and Co. are unbelievable:

It was one of the most educational experiences of my life. Seriously. I could see from their very inception, the birth of countless bad ideas...and the murder of good ones. I witnessed the endless creative battles and the cowardly finger pointing. Honestly, if this is how movies of this size usually get made -- I'm amazed they get made at all....

Bryan Singer has an issue with never doing test screenings...and has the juice to enforce it. Instead, he has what he calls "Friends and Family" screenings. This is where the crew and executives can invite a limited number of -- well – “Friends and Family” to see a rough cut of the movie. So, as it turns out, this version of the movie clocks in at well over three hours. The cards come back from the audience and, lo and behold, most of them say it's too long.

After a lot of tense meetings and heated arguments with the execs, the decision was made to cut several sequences. Several WHOLE sequences. Yes, there were trims made within the rest of the movie -- but they were minimal. The majority of the cuts include several scenes that I believe, by and large, were necessary for the story. Not only that, but several sequences that survived should have easily ended up in the Avid trash bin -- but remained in for the very reason you stated, "Because they looked cool."

WOW! So apparently there may have been a little more meat to the film but Singer would rather cut things that were integral to the story instead of things that were "cool looking." Ah, but the plot thickens:

You know, I can safely say that there wasn't one moment that I was really connected with these characters. They just seemed like blanks, hoping that the audience would imbue them with some sort of malevolence. They were as dumb as a box of rocks and their master plan was moronic. I laugh every time somebody says that Lex's whole scheme is a stupid real estate grab. I mean, who the hell does he think would ever want to live on that disgusting piece of crap?

Keep in mind this is someone from the FILM CREW saying this! Another great read, and it actually explains how some of the film actually had parts that were necessary to the plot left on the cutting room floor because Singer doesn't know how to edit a film properly and his ego is too big to allow a proper test screening for anyone who's not a lackey of his. I highly recommend spending the time to read it all. It shows just how this cast and crew was seemingly flying by the seat of their pants while ruining Superman in the process.

Box Office Update: IMAX Life Support

It's been a couple crazy weeks around here recently, so postings have been few and far between, but rest assured we're working on some doozies for you. In the meantime, let's check in at the Singerman box office.

In its 11th weekend at the domestic box office, Singerman took in a whopping $453,273, and its total domestic take still sits at a disappointing $197,430,626. Frankly we're a little surpised that it's gotten this far based on how it was tracking earlier. Looking at the statistics, we can see its barely in many theaters (241) and hasn't been for a few weeks now. Where has the money come from the past 3 weeks you ask? The answer: IMAX. That's basically all Singerman is left in at this point, and that's because it's contracted to be there per a WB agreement with IMAX, as are a few of the other disappointing WB summer releases like The Ant Bully. We dont know what WB paid IMAX for that this summer, but whatever it is it's not enough, and they're going to owe them BIG TIME come time for the next contract, as IMAX has pretty much saved their summer slate from total embarassment by adding a nice chunk to their disappointing films bottom lines.

Does this mean Singerman finally found "legs" on IMAX? No, not at all. That term refers to a film's stint in traditional theaters. IMAX is less about the quality of the film in the theater and more about the experience of the visuals in the film with the huge screen, 3-D, etc. Why do you think people go to those theaters to watch 2 hour movies on honey bees? Singerman's moping must even look cool in 3-D, though we seriously doubt it. Expect IMAX to have WB over a barrel when the next contract comes up for negotiation.

As for the obligatory Batman Begins comparison, in Begins 11th weekend at the U.S. box office it took in $445,373, or about 1.8% less, for a total domestic take of $203,019,055, or about 3.8% more. Keep in mind Begins had a more limited IMAX release and didn't have the benefit of having 3-D footage in it, oh yeah and the fact that it cost CONSIDERABLY less to make and market. Should be fun to see how this one finishes out since Begins spiked up again in its 12th and 13th weekend at the B.O..

Why Singerman is an "Affront to all That is Good and Decent?"

A reader sent us this link to a rant by Thom Holbrook over on PooBala.com. Overall it's a pretty good read and hits a lot of the same points that we did about the film. He also has some amusing ways to fill in some of the blanks in plot and logic with the film. One of our favorite parts of the rant reads as follows:

"Lois Lane had a child and became involved with Perry White's son. Seeing that Lois is practically engaged to Richard White, Superman does what any true heroic figure would do. He steps aside. Oh no… wait… I got that wrong. Let me go again. Seeing that Lois is practically engaged to Richard White, Superman tries to mack on her and seduce her away, only stopping when Lois tells him to back off. But THEN he backs off and goes away. Wait… no… wrong again. Sorry. After that Superman flies to Lois's house and like a super powered stalker floats outside watching their every move inside with his x-ray vision. I get the idea. Superman is outcast and alone and we pity him. Again, I don't want to pity Superman. And regardless of why he is doing it, it's creepy. Finally, I have no pity for this Superman because this is a situation all of his own making. He flew off into space for five years on an idiotic mission showing no concern for Lois Lane. Now she's involved and happy and I should pity Bag-Of-Hammers Man? I don't even like the dolt at this point."

Wow, it's as if this guy was channeling the staff here when writing this. A long review but well worth a read in our opinion.

The Delusions of Kate Bosworth

From the "When Monkeys Fly Out of my Butt" file:

Apparently Neal Sean over at gossip site Sky News talked with the incredible shrinking Kate Bosworth recently about all things Singerman and beyond. For those of you consuming a beverage at the moment, I recommend finishing it before reading any further because you run the risk of ruining your monitor.

Finished? Good. Here we go:

"Thanks to her starring role as Lois Lane in the recent Superman movie, Kate Bosworth is much in demand. And...is already planning her portrayal of Lois in the next Superman film.She said: "Lois will be back bigger and better in the next movie, and with more of her own storyline.""

I can only imagine the amount of thought she must be putting into the part, after her vapid, lifeless portrayal of the iconic character in Singerman's first go around, proving what we had said all along, that she was overwhelmed by the part and looked terribly miscast. Although I can't quite fathom exactly how much more of a Lois storyline they could possibly cram into another movie, if we're somehow unlucky enough to have another one with her in it forced upon us like a drunken uncle? I mean instead of constantly watching Singerman mope over her, will we just be seeing close-ups of her looking defiant, while we're told by some supporting cast member that Singerman is moping over her off camera? I should probably stop there and not give Harris and Dougherty any more ideas.

"Not only that, but I can reveal there are plans to give Lois Lane her very own investigation spin-off."

Did someone at the studio tell you this to get you in bed or something? I mean c'mon girl, the feature film allegedley about Superman is limping it's way to semi-profitability, and you think they're going to give YOU of all people their own spin-off film? What's Lois going to do? Investigate news, get into trouble, and then wait for the rescue that never comes? Then again, I guess some people could argue that Singerman WAS a Lois Lane spinoff in the first place, so perhaps maybe she's not that far off-base?

"What will the caped crusader think about that?"

I dont know Neal? What do you think BATMAN would think about that? Probably the same thing that most anyone with a half of a functioning cortex would think: that the idea blows. Superman on the other hand...