ROTTEN TOMATOES: Box Office Guru Wrapup: Twilight Soars to $70M+ Opening Comments

Box Office Guru Wrapup: Twilight Soars to $70M+ Opening

by Gitesh Pandya | November 23, 2008

Summary

This weekend the vampire love story Twilight stunned the film industry with an explosive opening leading the overall marketplace to one of the biggest November weekends in box office history. Disney went the other way with its new animated entry Bolt which debuted below expectations in third place. Along with some strong holdovers, the box office posted its best performance in four months. Back to Article

(1-42 of 42 posts) | Reply

PennsylvaniaJames writes:
on Nov 23 2008 06:46 PM

Blech-so the sequels will get made. Oh well. It'll still never be half as good as Harry Potter.

(Reply to this)

Superzone writes:
on Nov 23 2008 07:27 PM

Bolt should have made more money than Twilight. Seriously.

(Reply to this)

AntonChigurh writes:
on Nov 23 2008 07:53 PM

And to think Summit Entertainment said they were excpecting a 20million doller opening weekend. Twilight is harmless fluff and at least has more intellect behind it than HSH3, so bring on New Moon, Eclipse and Breaking Dawn.

(Reply to this)

The NewHampshire Database writes:
on Nov 23 2008 07:54 PM

In reply to this comment (#2148603)
Is it going to hurt your feelings because it didn't? Get over it.

(Reply to this)

MMacKK writes:
on Nov 23 2008 07:58 PM

Wow. Thats ****ed. Well done.
I'm still keen as mustard for Slumdog though.
Bring on the greatness of Danny Boyle.

(Reply to this)

Splitter writes:
on Nov 23 2008 08:07 PM

Bolt's the only one here with legs, wait and see.

(Reply to this)

kaitune writes:
on Nov 23 2008 08:10 PM

My friends are going to see Twilight again although once is quite enough for me (unless somebody is paying me to see it) I am quite interested to see how much this film will finish at.

I am definitely going to see Bolt as soon as I can along with Role Models. (It is quite funny how I ended up seeing the film I am less interested in before the films I actually really want to see. Never mind thought, at less it was hardly another Eragon)

(Reply to this)

CalvinandHobbes23 writes:
on Nov 23 2008 08:17 PM

this is a sad day in cinema history
:(

(Reply to this)

jokerboy1991 writes:
on Nov 23 2008 08:33 PM

In reply to this comment (#2148686)
Agreed, but I think this flick will have big drop offs and won't past 150 mil. Also did fans even like the movie, I was on IMDB and it had a rating of 5 or something and I usually find IMDB'S ratings reliable unlike YAHOO. No surprise on the big drop off for Quantum, most people I talked to didn't like it. Also I am glad to see Slumdog is getting its wheels rolling, because it is a great ****ing movie. Also, I'm really excited to see Australia and Milk this wednesday, there hasn't been many good flicks this season so far.

(Reply to this)

papouse writes:
on Nov 23 2008 08:40 PM

Wow, that's extremely impressive! I had never even heard of Twilight until about a week ago. No noticeble stars attached, mediocre reviews yet almost double the budget in takings in its opening weekend? Someone must have done something right! Was it heavily marketed over there in the U.S.? I imagine the people involved had some good celebrations over the weekend...

CalvinandHobbes23, "this is a sad day in cinema history"? Why? Because something you're not a fan of is popular?

(Reply to this)

ZiGyStRdUsT writes:
on Nov 23 2008 08:45 PM

In reply to this comment (#2148720)
no, cuz it proves the industry can make and market **** and we'll still eat it.

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on Nov 23 2008 08:56 PM

"Twilight" is sextist, and boring and it's already made undeserved millions. It's madness.

"And madness as you know is like gravity, all it takes is a little push! He hee ha ha , he HA HA HA HA HEE HA HO!"

I miss the summer movie season so much.

(Reply to this)

Hamboner writes:
on Nov 23 2008 08:56 PM

Roll Models is going to prove that Stifler may well have a longer career than originally thought, albeit as a bankable role-player in comedies. I don't know why, but that makes me happy.

(Reply to this)

Jon B. writes:
on Nov 23 2008 09:17 PM

Meh, I predicted it would draw 70 million, despite numerous rancid reviews, because it catered to a certain demographic. I think this will dwindle severely in coming weeks, considering a ripple of disappointment that seems to have plagued the film following its release. I saw Role Models this weekend, and yet the theater was still packed, but feel I had a satiable experience. 'Twas a consistently humorous film all the way through. Patiently anticipating a month of what I hope to be spectacular releases now.

(Reply to this)

tfortier writes:
on Nov 23 2008 09:28 PM

Why when we reply a post we got a stupid number at the place of a name?? this is really dumb. "In reply to this comment (#2148720)". There is no numbers on any post... how the hell can we know wich comment it is..?!

Do I miss something?

(Reply to this)

papouse writes:
on Nov 23 2008 09:33 PM

ZiGyStRdUsT, *sigh*, got any more awesome clich�s?

You know what books I loved to read when I was a kid? 'Goosebumps' by R.L. Stine. They were hugely popular in the mid-90's, and I remember my mother, who has always been an avid reader, hated that I chose to read those books instead of all the 'literature' she had. Looking back, she was probably right, cause those Goosebumps books really did suck. But I, along with most of the kids back then really enjoyed them, because, well, we were kids. And kids generally aren't that bright.

Just quickly scanning the net for some reviews about this 'Twilight' book series, and the general consensus from critics seems to be fairly negative. However, they've been hugely successful with girls in their early teens. Are the critics right, or are they maybe letting their undoubtedly godlike literary standard get in the way of what it might be like for young girl i.e. 'target audience' to experience?

(Reply to this)

jokerboy1991 writes:
on Nov 23 2008 09:37 PM

Also is it just me or does it look like that guy Edward is trying to impersonate Zoolander? Because he always has this dumb look on his face that made him look like he was trying to do Blue Still, ONE LOOK! Also what the hell is up with the Zach Braff hair cut?!?

(Reply to this)

tannerk04 writes:
on Nov 23 2008 09:52 PM

In reply to this comment (#2148728)
To everyone that is talking so much B.S. about Twilight... Get over it! The books are huge and the movie killed... It may not be the best film ever but I'm sure some of your favorites suck ***. With the money Twilight made New Moon's budget should make it a much better movie. Yet I'm guessing you'll all still complain...

(Reply to this)

ZiGyStRdUsT writes:
on Nov 23 2008 09:55 PM

In reply to this comment (#2148766)
to you who is asking about the numbers response thing. If you click on the link it reloads the page and the so-numbered post becomes the top post on the screen cuz the thing scrolls down to it. It's very counter intuitive and I wish RT would make it simpler.

(Reply to this)

jokerboy1991 writes:
on Nov 23 2008 10:22 PM

In reply to this comment (#2148799)
LOL, man Twilight fans are so defensive. I mean we all complain some times when people ***** about stuff we like but we don't discard there opinions generally being stupid but just opinions. Also movies that aren't good can make money, like Twilight, also like The Passion, Fantastic 4 flicks, etc. Also, I love how you tell the haters to get over it when you sound so angry where all of us are just basically having fun by poking jokes. I mean, I think your uh lol over reacting to us just having fun. Like I don't ***** when people tell me usually movies or books that I like suck, unless there just stupid and I think you can't justify that claim here because the reviews don't lie and don't say "oh the critics don't know anything" because then why exactly would you come to a site that basically gathers critics reviews and all the members here basically just critique movies and movie news.

(Reply to this)

knowingtoast85 writes:
on Nov 23 2008 10:49 PM

I bet too conservatively for once. I predicted 55 mil, after my doubting friends talked me down from 60.

All my talk about seeing it whilst totally hammered was for naught. I didn't even manage to see Slumdog. There's always tomorrow after work.

(Reply to this)

Brittany M. writes:
on Nov 23 2008 11:08 PM

Hmm. It surprised me, gotta say. The fanbase was clearly bigger than my numbers indicated (either that, or against all odds every Twilight fan has a boyfriend and dragged him along so he can see what she wishes he was, since this about doubled my expected take). I think moving Bolt up a week ended up being a bad move; if they'd sat on their release date they could have let Twilight have its weekend and opened much bigger. As it stands, I think a lot of families might have just been waiting for the Thanksgiving weekend to see the movie, and others might have just wanted to avoid the multiplex and the screaming girls this weekend (which is why I waited to see Bolt on Saturday instead of Friday).

I still think Twilight is going to fall hard next weekend, as most of the big opening films target its audience in some way. It pulled off a major coup this weekend, but $150M is still a ways off.

(Reply to this)

blattman writes:
on Nov 23 2008 11:56 PM

I have minimal interest in Twilight, but several friends whose opinions I respect (some read the book, some didn't) all liked it. I'll see for myself eventually (possibly on cable). Next up for me is Bolt. I am a sucker for a good animated film.

(Reply to this)

Ace69 writes:
on Nov 24 2008 01:46 AM

If you guys are going to see Bolt see it in 3D its way better the film is waaayyy better than Twilight by a longshot.
Actually i liked it more than Wall-E.

(Reply to this)

~*Admiral Snowstorm*~ writes:
on Nov 24 2008 03:45 AM

It's kind of ironic that Bolt ended up making less than Happy Feet, Bee Movie, and Chicken Little. All three of those were pretty awful, and, though I haven't seen Bolt, it apparently is better than all of them. Sometimes I swear there's an inverse relationship between quality and profit.

(Reply to this)

Gimy writes:
on Nov 24 2008 06:23 AM

just so you know...Beverly Hills Chihuahuah was NOT rated "G". i know cuz my son's mom ripped me apart for taking my 5 year old to see it. according to her and our parenting coordinator...i'm not allowed to take our son to see PG movies unless i go waste $ and see it myself, then confirm it's ok. THEN...i can take him. so again, the boring movie...NOT rated G, trust me...i know

best movie out...is still Role Models. one of the funniest movies of the year...

(Reply to this)

Speaker for the Films writes:
on Nov 24 2008 06:43 AM

It's said that Disney has been spewing up (save Pixar, of course), dare I say, crap. And now the realese and actual (gasp!!) great movie and it makes less money than a dancing high school and chihualua movie. Lets hope Bolt will have legs, though.

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on Nov 24 2008 08:56 AM

LOL jokerboy, for the Zoolander refrnence. Maybe another vampire can be Owen Wilson.

(Reply to this)

nogard46 writes:
on Nov 24 2008 09:04 AM

I love it!!!

the nerdy little fanboys buoyed a mediocre movie called The Dark Knight all summer long!

Now all the nerdy fangirls will keep Twilight going all fall/winter long!

OME!!!! FTW!!

Its interesting reading these posts and the complete and total lack of understanding of what Twilight is about makes it all the more special.

Twilight is a throw back to earlier times, earlier cinema.

Call it sexist if you will but it was nice to see an old fashion love story of girl loves boy, and not what wacky hollywood wants us to enjoy, like boy loves boy, or girl loves girl.

and that is all it is the heart of Twilight is just a Boy-Girl love story, WOW Thats so shocking huh????
WHO would thunk it??? Who would think anybody would ever want to see that huh???

You people are hopeless.

(Reply to this)

vitajex writes:
on Nov 24 2008 10:25 AM

Here's why the 'Twilight' sequels will fail (relatively):

It takes the average film more than one year from pre-production to release.

The average 'Twilight' fan is 14-17.

The average 14-17 year old has an attention span approaching that of a fruit fly.

Evidence: the careers of N'Sync, Hanson, Tiffany, Debbie Gibson, et al; the TV series 'Felicity', cutting, the rise of fall of so many products, the list never ends.

By the time the third film comes out, the targeted audience won't be interested anymore. They'll be too busy with some new inanity.

Just think of the 'South Park' episode where everyone's into Chinpokomon. By the time Kyle buys one of the figures, everybody's else says, "Oh, we're done with that. We're on something else now."

The other problem is that, while the first cost $35 million or whatever, the next won't be so cheap. How many people believe that Pattinson and Stewart are gonna look at the box office receipts and say, "Yeah, I'll do the crummy sequel for the same crummy paycheck..."?

(Reply to this)

Floor Man writes:
on Nov 24 2008 11:21 AM

Twilight: what a sad commentary on our culture....

On second thought, though, there's hope; Slumdog Millionaire is kicking a** in theater averages and reviews...so now it's #1 on my list of movies to see!

(Reply to this)

sirdarkhorse writes:
on Nov 24 2008 11:49 AM

we are the twi-hards hear us . . .. . .ROAR!?!

lol! seriously watching this (twilight) mother reach up in the RT rankings over the weekend was like being at the pony's =)

Yes. i am even more pathetic in real life =(

(Reply to this)

Salty Gritts writes:
on Nov 24 2008 12:27 PM

I love when people on this site moan and groan when a movie like HSM3 or Twilight does well. Like they are shocked and filled with rage that a mainstream movie with a built-in loyal fanbase does extremely well. Are you really that surprised? Come grow up, the mainstream fluff is always going to do well even if it is garbage, it's just the way it is. Stop whining, stop complaining, and deal with it. Honestly you guys are so dense sometimes it drives me nuts. TDK and Iron Man are essentially the same thing as Twilight (albeit of much higher quality and with different demographics), yet none of you complain when those movies do well. Seriously guys, come on, stop saying how much of a dark day this is for humanity and just except the fact that movies like Twilight are going to do well, it's not going to change so stop complaining.

/Rant

(Reply to this)

ledawg1138 writes:
on Nov 24 2008 01:52 PM

In response to idiots like nogard46, stop talking if you obviously want attention OR just get under folks skin.

(Reply to this)

sirdarkhorse writes:
on Nov 24 2008 02:31 PM

i think what is curious here is how most if not all the peeps who comment on the movie in the RT community abso...lutely bash on the film. i mean the movie made over 70 million dollars and you couldn't find one RT reviewer who had anything nice to say about the movie come fri. or sat. they were like 100% pissed off at Stephenie meyer and the director and all these peeps in the movie. i mean say what you will about the built in fan base, but twilights built in fan base (judging by the posts and tomatoe meter) was left in shambles.... its funny *** hell!!!! this is like ****ing christmas over here..... i love it! eat it you little bitches! omg. there heart broken over here, some of them are coming around now though, now that they've seen it for the fifth time NOW they understand what the director was trying to do, and that even if it's not like the book , its still a pretty good stand alone movie.

'nuffSaid

(Reply to this)

PennsylvaniaJames writes:
on Nov 24 2008 03:16 PM

I actually read the first Twilight book a couple months back and I thought it was crap. Beyond crap. The writing stunk and the characters were uninteresting. But now I guess we just have to live with the fact that this mediocre movie will make at least 145 million. *Sigh*.

(Reply to this)

Splitter writes:
on Nov 24 2008 05:03 PM

In reply to this comment (#2149478)
Okay... *cracks knuckles* let's start from the beginning.

TDK was the biggest seller of the year. Guys and girls all got in on it. It was a superhero movie that did not extend itself as a superhero movie, featured phenomenal acting, had 24-7 showings, and had the best first and second weekend gross of all time.

Twilight had half of TDK's opening, attracts a single audience, features acting that won't even get so much as a glance for Oscar buzz, and had one midnight showing.

OME? OME? I swear if you aren't 12, grow up NOW.

What is it about Twilight that we have a complete lack of understanding about? It is what it is. A story about a girl who falls in love with a vegetarian vampire who sparkles. It's a chick flick disguised as a vampire movie. It's ideological escapism. If that's what you like, great, but don't get mad at others who completely disagree with your opinion.

There were bad movies in early cinema too. Not everything was Casablanca.

I saw what you did there. There's so many movies that feature girls in love with guys that are fantastic. Why the hell do you have to use Twilight as an anti-gay vehicle? People still enjoy guy-girl romances even in this day and age and will continue to. Queer cinema however goes under the rug repeatedly year after year. You have nothing to ***** about, so get off your high horse already.

(Reply to this)

T45Red writes:
on Nov 24 2008 07:19 PM

In reply to this comment (#2150412)
Thanks for replying back to nogard 46 for me. When I read that post, I was like, wtf? And was hoping that someone replied back to that nonsense.

By the way, I checked Box Office Mojo and TDK made pretty much the same in one day as Twilight did in it's entire weekend LOL Only saying that because I had people who believed that Twilight would be bigger than TDK, which made me laugh. I think it was because they were blinding by their sheer love of everything Twilight.

I think I actually want to see the movie just so I can actually give them better reasons as to why it was a failure as a movie.

(Reply to this)

707PG13 writes:
on Nov 24 2008 08:58 PM

nogard 46

are you serious?

(Reply to this)

Spencer R. writes:
on Nov 24 2008 09:04 PM

In reply to this comment (#2150725)
t45red

Come on i hope your avatar does not indicate that you like the spiderman movies and then you try to make fun of twilight. Because that series is the epitome of a terrible love story hidden in a bad movie genre.

(Reply to this)

Nerdo86 writes:
on Nov 25 2008 12:56 AM

i just think everyone should stop wasting their time complaining about twilight, i don't really plan on seeing it until it probably gets dvd but in the meantime i'll spend my movie money on good movies like bolt and role models...

(Reply to this)

DA C. writes:
on Nov 26 2008 03:42 PM

In reply to this comment (#2149670)
For objective reviews (of any sort), the reviewer needs certain qualities: a basic understanding of film-making (i.e. the relationships between director, writer, actor, etc.) and most importantly a knowledge base of previous movies with which to compare. This definition will exclude many of the positive reviewers here who I suspect are teenagers / early 20's i.e. people who have not been around long enough to know a good movie even if it bit them in the ***. So to clarify future 'positive' review posts to this thread, please state your age before posting. (By the way, I am 37.) If not, then we can all assume that your some teenager whose TV only gets the WB (you know, the one that alternates between teenage angst and acne cream commercials). All joking aside you should check out this reviewer who summed up my feelings: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXZi25kwhHA

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Twilight

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links