MONSTER INC Box Office Results

[919Florida]

LOS ANGELES (AP) -- "Monsters, Inc." scared away the weekend competition.

The film about a monster factory that collects kids' screams recorded the best debut in film history for an animated film and the sixth-best opening of all time, bringing in $63.5 million, according to studio estimates Sunday.

"Monsters, Inc.," the latest film from the Disney/Pixar partnership that produced the "Toy Story" movies and "A Bug's Life," far outdistanced those earlier hits.

The previous top opening for an animated film was the $57.4 million recorded by 1999's "Toy Story 2," which also held the previous record for best November opening.

"There's something about the Pixar/Disney partnership whereby the creative forces behind these films really know what kids want to see," said Paul Dergarabedian, president of Exhibitor Relations, which tracks the box office. "Everything that they do with these films seems to exactly capture what kids are looking for."

Opening in second place over the Friday-to-Sunday weekend was "The One," Jet Li's latest action film. The film brought in $20 million, the strongest opening to date for a film starring Li. Unlike his earlier "Romeo Must Die" and "Kiss of the Dragon," the film was rated PG-13, not R.

"Domestic Disturbance", a thriller starring John Travolta, debuted in third place, bringing in $14.5 million.

BOX OFFICE TOP 10
Estimated ticket sales for Friday through Sunday at North American theaters, according to Exhibitor Relations Co. Inc. Final figures are to be released Monday.

1. "Monsters Inc.," $63.5 million.
2. "The One," $20 million.
3. "Domestic Disturbance," $14.5 million.
4. "K-Pax," $10.7 million.
5. "Thirteen Ghosts," $8 million.
6. "Riding in Cars with Boys," $4.5 million.
7. "From Hell," $3.7 million.
8. "Training Day," $3.2 million.
9. "Bandits," $3 million.
10. "Serendipity," $2.5 million.





The openings rang in the holiday movie season in decisive fashion. Receipts for the top 12 movies were up nearly 90 percent over last weekend, and 44 percent over the same weekend last year.

"In light of the tragedy of September 11, the box office has just been incredible. People want an escape," Dergarabedian said. "We're on record pace for the year."

"Monsters" is the sort of movie Disney typically would release right around Thanksgiving, but the studio moved it to early November hoping to cash in before the Warner Bros. "Harry Potter" juggernaut hits the weekend before Thanksgiving. (Warner Bros. is a sister AOL Time Warner company to CNN.com.)

"Monsters, Inc." features the voices of John Goodman as the gorilla-like Sully and Billy Crystal as his pal Mike Wazowski -- an eyeball with arms and legs. Havoc ensues when Goodman's character accidentally lets a little girl wander through her closet into the monster world, where human children are considered toxic.

Disney officials were ecstatic Sunday at the film's success.

"It's just fabulous," said Disney distribution chief Chuck Viane. "We knew it was good, but breaking records -- you very seldom expect that."

The take for "Monsters, Inc." easily outdistanced the $42.4 million DreamWorks' animated "Shrek" brought in on its opening weekend in May. But "Shrek" remained strong for weeks, and at $267 million is the year's highest-grossing movie so far.

Two films did very well opening in limited release.

The whimsical French-language romance "Amelie," a big hit at Cannes, stars Audrey Tautou as a quirky woman who sets out to put some meaning and love into the lives of those around her. It was on only three screens -- two in New York and one in Los Angeles -- and took in a total of $140,000, an outstanding $46,667 per screen average.

Opening on 38 screens, the Coen brothers' latest film, "The Man Who Wasn't There," brought in $673,300 over the weekend for a $17,718 per screen average.

Jack Foley, president of distribution for USA Films, said the studio is being cautious about bringing out the black-and-white film starring Billy Bob Thornton and Frances McDormand. It's in 17 markets now and will expand to about 30 next weekend, he said.

"We're letting those who believe spread the word, and there are a lot of believers," Foley said.

Estimated ticket sales for Friday through Sunday at North American theaters, according to Exhibitor Relations Co. Inc. Final figures are to be released Monday.

 

[Bob O]

I dont really look at this as a positive for disney. They have their name attached but it was pixar that created the move and was the creative genuis behind it. Disneys own animated movies have been flops when compared to pixar's achievements and doesnt bode well when the contract is up and they are on their own. Disney hasnt shown the ability to be as creative as pixar has been and it shows with the box office comparsions.

 

[JimB.]

ON the other hand Bob, I think this is GREAT news for the company.

Maybe not in the financial sense totally, but it gets the company name back in the public eye in a positive light.

And I'm not sure, but I think some research will show that Pixar made this movie, along with the others, with an EXCEPTIONAL amount of creative input from Disney, including storylies, screenwriting and character developement. I doubt very seriously that Disney just "cut Pixar loose" to churn out whatever their own little digital minds could dream up, and then agree to market whatever comes out the end of the drain pipe.

Not to mention that they probably have to work real hard to keep Steve Jobs under control. He's crafty & smart, but sometimes can be loopier than a $3 bill.

P.S. The movie is outstanding. Great characters, story, animation, and without the continual bathroom humor that permeated "Shrek".

 

[YoHo]

This is definatly a plus for Disney

(What the Heck? Shrek blasts to the top and its bad for Disney. Pixar does a great film FOR Disneyand its bad for Disney, Is Star Wars a bad deal for FOX?)

Trust me, Disney is going to get plenty more movies out of Pixar with the current contract, and with numbers like this, I doubt that Disney would simply let them walk. (I know they may not have a choice, that's not the point)

 

[MickeyMoose15]

The teaser trailer for Star Wars Episode II wasn't that great as I expected.

 

[Planogirl]

Well, I think that the jury is still out on whether this movie will affect Disney in the long run or not. Their name gets out there for sure but if they release another mediocre animated movie, I think that many people might start noticing the difference. More than a few friends who aren't Disney fanatics have mentioned the new PIXAR movie to me, not the new DISNEY movie. I hope that Disney's next movie is great however because then it's all gravy!

 

[DramaTech]

Don't forget the "short" at the beginning. Pixar is now well known for those too, and the birds were hilarious. I hope they put bloopers and outtakes on Monsters, Inc at some point, as that was a great addition to A Bug's Life and Toy Story 2.

 

[TheWho]

The movie ending is primed for a sequel. In some ways, it was a bit dissapointing because I wanted to see the next event. However, the movie was great and deserves to make mega bucks. I hope Disney keeps the relationship with Pixar because a sequel can not be far behind. The birds in the beginning were also very funny.

 

[BRERALEX]

I read posts here alot and if monster inc did bad people would say this is bad for disney without a doubt. so the movie does good and its bad for disney?

 

[DisneyFanGuy]

There is no down side to anyone here. I swear, some folks could spot the only cloud on a beautiful, sunny day. Pixar is building their brand, and it gets bigger with every film. Disney has its best opening of the year, and McDonalds sells a bunch of happy meals. We have some new characters to add to the parks, and I enjoy the "biggest surprise" movie in ages! (I didn't really expect it to be so enjoyable)

Disney even has another week to enjoy big box office results before everyone goes to Hogwarts for Thanksgiving. (Moving the opening date was a very good move!)

Yeah!

 

[YoHo]

MickeyMoose15, did you take a trip to East Troy and Smoke the Funky Grass in the Alpine Valley Parking lot?

As self proclaimed Star Wars Fanboy, I hereby Declare the EpII Teaser Trailer to RULE!!!

The Sound being the best park.


P.S. My Bears Will Crush your Packers. BWAHAHAHAHA Vengence is Mine!!

(I'll stop now, I think people would be mad if we took this thread over to argue Bears Packers. )

 

[Another Voice]

Power belongs to those that can create.

The credit for ‘Monsters’ is going to Pixar, whether that is deserved or not is another question. But with that credit goes the power. Short-term financial gains are nice, but power – the power to attract talent, stories and hype -- is more important over the long run. The new cliché around town is that you’re only as good as your next picture.

Disney has almost no creative input into Pixar’s production and Pixar is under no obligation to use any of Disney’s “suggestions”. The Pixar creative team dislikes Disney’s management and the experience of ‘Toy Story 2’ proved to Pixar, in their minds at least, that they are much better at process than Disney. The limit of Disney’s control is in the contract – The Mouse can simply refuse to release the movie they receive from Pixar. And even I don’t think that Eisner is that dumb.

On another topic – there are rumors that some markets were supposed to receive the first ‘Lilo and Stitch’ trailer instead of re-edited ‘Peter Pan 2’ trailer. Has anyone out there seen it?

 

[All Aboard]

AV, we got Return to Neverland in Miami. What's the projected release of Lilo & Stitch? I would gess that it would be mid-June given the trend that began with Lion King. I was glad to see that Neverland was a Feb release. I feared (out of lack of knowledge) that it would be the only 2002 animated feature. That would have been a real disappointment.

AV help remind me of what is in the animated feature pipline and the guesstimated release dates. I know that Treasure Planet is in there. Is Country Bears animated? Thanks.

YoHo, I am by no means a Star Wars guy (I haven't even seen Episode I). I thought the trailer was very intriguing. I thought the changing of each scene with Vader's breathing was a creative effect. Clearly, I now have to see Ep I before May.

 

[YoHo]

Just mentally block the scene's with Jar Jar and it will be all good.

 

[Bob O]

I would agree with anotherVoice. Its a great opening and i will see it soon as I thought the trailers looked very good. But disney may profit short term but this is the work of pixar, their creative talent and not disney. And if rumors are true the relationship bewtween pixar and disney isnt great and with the success pixar has had when the contract is up they will set the price and not disney. if pixar goes to dreamworks/universal/fox when the deal is done they will then profit and disney still hasnt produced a animated movie in several years that was a great commerical success that then can be used to create rides/shows/toy sales, the so-called synergy everybody looks for. Disney needs to get away from their standard movie with cutsie singing animals and do somerthing a little more risque that will attract more then just small kids/ toddlers, bigger kids who see movies like things to be a little more gross etc than disney produces. Just mu opinion for what ever its worth.

 

[YoHo]

Uh, Tarzan did pretty well. Wasn't THAT long ago. They even have an attraction for it.

 

[All Aboard]

Disney needs to get away from their standard movie with cutsie singing animals and do somerthing a little more risque that will attract more then just small kids/ toddlers, bigger kids who see movies like things to be a little more gross etc than Disney produces.

Don't know if I could possibly disagree more.

Let's see... major Disney box office successes in the past 12 years. The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Lion King, Tarzan. I see alot of "cutsie singing animals there and not any grossness.

Disney departed from that success formula with Atlantis and see how far it got them. Quite the contrary, Disney need to RETURN to the formula of their success. Great Story, Great Music, Lovable Characters, Hateable Villain = success.

 

[JustBob]

hear hear, gcurling! Especially the great music!

 

[Another Voice]

Partners for Pixar – So they can’t learn marketing very quickly? Hmmmm, seems like they have a pretty good brand name already and isn’t that most of the battle? Besides, all they have to do is partner with one of a dozen studios: Columbia, MGM, Warner Brothers, and others that might be somewhat interested. Dreamworks has had some pretty good successes with this model. And Fox is releasing their computer animated ‘Ice Age’ next spring. No studio will be out of the animation business until there’s no money in it.

2006 – isn’t that far away for these kinds of films. ‘Monsters, Inc.’ began production back in 1998. The last film for Disney has already started. That means Pixar can start working on non-Disney films immediately. Free from Burbank’s control, it seems that this creative team might be shopping projects around already. Excuse me for a moment: Mr. Lucas – there’s a call for you on line two.

Small print – actually Disney and Pixar have joint control over the ‘Toy Story’ and ‘Bug’s Life’ characters. Just look at all those ® symbols. Pixar took Disney to court over this one before the reached a settlement; another cause of the hard feelings. There isn’t a Pixar animator who doesn’t point out the “Copyright Disney and Pixar” label on the “bottom” of Buzz in ‘Toy Story 2’. Yes, Disney can make sequels if it wants to, but ‘Buzz Lightyear of StarCommand’ hasn’t exactly been a ratings smash. It takes more than a brand name to make a popular movie.

Success is relative – Because of the importance animated films have in driving the entire company, Hollywood considers ‘The Lion King’ to be the last “successful” animated film. None of the others have lived up to either their box office or merchandising potential. Even ‘Tarzan’ didn’t crack $100 million and its merchandise was non-existent. None of the post-Katzenburg films have had the financial (‘The Little Mermaid’), critical (‘Beauty and The Beast’), creative (‘Aladdin’), or franchise (‘The Lion King’) success that qualifies them as a “hit”. And ‘Fantasia 2000’ was made just to keep Roy quiet at the board meetings. As a box office hit, Disney lost less money with ‘Corky Romano’.

A new tune – Disney very publicly declared the “singing animal musical animated feature” dead and released ‘Atlantis’ as “the wave of the future”. Meanwhile ‘Shrek’ stayed very truthful to the old Disney formula and covered over the some the staleness with some cleaver humor. A formula only seems like a formula when it’s not used well. Menken & Ashman could use the “formula” to produce genius, Elton John and Sting can’t.

Lastly – YoHo, you have to find a pirated copy of ‘Stars War 1: The Phantom Edit”. You would be amazed at how some good editing and the removal of all gratuitous Jar Jar can improve ‘Phantom Menace’.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

No studio will be out of the animation business until there’s no money in it.

Except for Disney. Didn't they chose to roll over and play dead earlier this year?