The movie "Sparkle" debuts at #5 on the box office chart over the weekend, taking in an extremely modest $12,000,000.

Honestly, these were the numbers I was expecting if Nippy were still alive. I figured there wouldn't be much public interest in the film. However, since her death, I thought "Sparkle" would have easily been on top during it's first weekend with a much higher gross.

Maybe if Madea had of been in it, the film would have done better.

Has anyone here seen it? If so, please post your reviews.

[Edited 8/20/12 7:54am]

I'm still trying 2 figure out "why" this movies was remade.

Graycap23 said:

I'm still trying 2 figure out "why" this movies was remade.

I know. I could see it being remade as a made-for-TV movie on BET or Lifetime. But as a box office movie? It just didn't make sense.

kitbradley said:

The movie "Sparkle" debuts at #5 on the box office chart over the weekend, taking in an extremely modest $12,000,000.

Honestly, these were the numbers I was expecting if Nippy were still alive. I figured there wouldn't be much public interest in the film. However, since her death, I thought "Sparkle" would have easily been on top during it's first weekend with a much higher gross.

Maybe if Madea had of been in it, the film would have done better.

Has anyone here seen it? If so, please post your reviews.

[Edited 8/20/12 7:54am]

It doesn't look like a very exciting movie to me (trailer). Whitney doesn't have lead role and there are so many movies with that kind of story. I expected it not to be a big boxoffice movie.

It's not an action movie.

I read that the movie played at a thousand fewer screens than the other movies so that also may have played a part in it debuting at #5 vs. debuting in the top 3.

kitbradley said:

The movie "Sparkle" debuts at #5 on the box office chart over the weekend, taking in an extremely modest $12,000,000.

Honestly, these were the numbers I was expecting if Nippy were still alive. I figured there wouldn't be much public interest in the film. However, since her death, I thought "Sparkle" would have easily been on top during it's first weekend with a much higher gross.

Maybe if Madea had of been in it, the film would have done better.

Has anyone here seen it? If so, please post your reviews.

Perhaps if the producers has chosen another lead actress other than untested Jordin Sparks the project would be garnering more interest. The good news for them is the film has a low budget of $14M.

...

[Edited 8/20/12 8:29am]

Identity said:

kitbradley said:

The movie "Sparkle" debuts at #5 on the box office chart over the weekend, taking in an extremely modest $12,000,000.

Honestly, these were the numbers I was expecting if Nippy were still alive. I figured there wouldn't be much public interest in the film. However, since her death, I thought "Sparkle" would have easily been on top during it's first weekend with a much higher gross.

Maybe if Madea had of been in it, the film would have done better.

Has anyone here seen it? If so, please post your reviews.

Perhaps if the producers has chosen another lead actress other than untested Jordin Sparks there would be more interest for the remade. Fortunately for them, the film has a low budget of $14M.

Trying 2 duplicate Hudson's success from Dream Girls was just DUMB.

What were the top 5 movies this week?

It's not like the original Sparkle was a big hit. It was thrown in with the other blaxploitation films (which meant it was mainly in theaters in black neighborhoods), and that was pretty much on the way out when it was released.

kitbradley said:

The movie "Sparkle" debuts at #5 on the box office chart over the weekend, taking in an extremely modest $12,000,000.

Honestly, these were the numbers I was expecting if Nippy were still alive. I figured there wouldn't be much public interest in the film. However, since her death, I thought "Sparkle" would have easily been on top during it's first weekend with a much higher gross.

Maybe if Madea had of been in it, the film would have done better.

Has anyone here seen it? If so, please post your reviews.

[Edited 8/20/12 7:54am]

though it may be looked at as modest, it depends on screens it was on and that average, im sure the number of screens was low, so the average was high per screen which is more than modest. Also 12 million, im guessing they have at least doubled what the movie cost to make, which means it already broke even, which films rarely do

The production cost of the movie is $14M, which is less than the average Tyler Perry fare. Thanks in part to the modest budget, the studio will recoup its investment.

Identity said:

The production cost of the movie is $14M, which is less than the average Tyler Perry fare. Thanks in part to the modest budget, the studio will recoup its investment.

so they will easily recoup the investment, because once it goes to dvd thats when the real $$ is made.

I didn't expect it to debut @ #1 anyway. I knew Expendables would easily take the weekend. But, I didn't expect it to come in at #5 either. I thought maybe the Whitney Houston swan song factor would have garnered a little more interest from the public.

I think people are just fatigued with these type of storylines now. Anyway, here's how this weekend box office broke down:

Taken from boxoffice.com

Graycap23 said:

Identity said:

Perhaps if the producers has chosen another lead actress other than untested Jordin Sparks there would be more interest for the remade. Fortunately for them, the film has a low budget of $14M.

Trying 2 duplicate Hudson's success from Dream Girls was just DUMB.

That's exactly what I think of when I see the previews....Dreamgirls Part deux. Not interested at all in seeing this movie and have no intentions to until it's released on Red Box. I'm going to see The Expendables 2 next weekend instead.

Honestly, I knew Sparkle wouldn't open at #1...but dang, I thought it would had at least come in at #2 or #3 being that Whitney passed and all.

MickyDolenz said:

It's not like the original Sparkle was a big hit. It was thrown in with the other blaxploitation films (which meant it was mainly in theaters in black neighborhoods), and that was pretty much on the way out when it was released.

True

Its a real shame the movie debut at number 5..... I knew it wasnt going to do well when I went upstairs in my theaters to see the movie instead of going downstairs where the movies that are just opened are shown.

The acting was much much much better than Dreamgirls and the storyline was more intense and wasnt so fairytale..... I was exactly pretty impressed with Mike Epps.

The PREVIEWS is why the movie hasnt done as well as it could have. The Previews are to to short and make it seem like its like Dreamgirls...... when it technically isnt...

Movies likes Dream Girls, Sparkle etc are movies that could have been T.V. made movies.... these are movies not meant for the big screen unless they are successfully marketed or have big names in them like Dreamgirls did even though its really a shitty movie besides J-hud.

Well tbh the movie look's predicatable as hell. And the reviews i have heard from people have been not good at all.

I have zero desire to see it after hearing the soundtrack.

I saw ParaNorman instead.

mjscarousal said:

Movies likes Dream Girls, Sparkle etc are movies that could have been T.V. made movies....

I don't think that's really it. It's a female oriented movie, which in general are not blockbusters. Then it's a musical, whose main popularity was in the 1940s and 1950s. It's like a western is not as likely to be popular now, but decades ago they were all over the movies and TV.

MickyDolenz said:

mjscarousal said:

Movies likes Dream Girls, Sparkle etc are movies that could have been T.V. made movies....

I don't think that's really it. It's a female oriented movie, which in general are not blockbusters. Then it's a musical, whose main popularity was in the 1940s and 1950s. It's like a western is not as likely to be popular now, but decades ago they were all over the movies and TV.

Sparkle is based off of a TRUE story unlike Dreamgirls and it was not a musical.

I agree with Gray... I think classics shouldnt be re-done

I think people thought it would be like Dreamgirls which is why they didnt see it but I see your point

[Edited 8/20/12 11:55am]

mjscarousal said:

Sparkle is based off of a TRUE story unlike Dreamgirls and it was not a musical.

I agree with Gray... I think classics shouldnt be re-done

I think people thought it would be like Dreamgirls which is why they didnt see it but I see your point

Whether or not it's a true story, it's still about a music group. Look at that Tom Cruise movie Rock Of Ages, it's based on 1980's hair rock groups, but it didn't do that well either, and Tom is more popular than Whitney movie wise. It's still a female movie, so guys are not as likely to go see it. You see what's #1, don't you? Movies with a mostly black cast don't usually draw a large mainstream audience either, like The Expendables or Batman can. Many black movies go straight to video, they're not in the cinema. I wasn't expecting Sparkle to do much. It's a remake of an obscure movie. Whitney has never really carried a movie, she either had a popular co-star or was part of an ensemble. Since it probably didn't cost that much to make, it should make it's money back.

actually i do not plan to go to the movie theatre to see this movie remake. in my area the original 1976 version of sparkle has been running for the last 3days on bet. i watched it last night. the capturing of the urban area lifestyle was very well done imo.

i cannot see this movie being done any better than the original.

lonette mckee tagged the role as "sister." (i'd be disappointed to go see the current remake because i feel no one could top lonette in this role. also the way the three ladies moved on stage while singing, imo "only en vogue could have done it that well."

irene cara was so cute! and

phillip michael thomas did great and (imo) looked so handsome!

the movie's sound track is by curtis mayfield ~ take a listen if you ever get to see this original version of 'sparkle'.

nope, not getting my bucks when i feel that the majority of the profits will go to clive davis. a man who partied floors below the lifeless body of whitney houston. nope, nada, not a dime.

[Edited 8/20/12 12:28pm]

Musicslave said:

I didn't expect it to debut @ #1 anyway. I knew Expendables would easily take the weekend. But, I didn't expect it to come in at #5 either. I thought maybe the Whitney Houston swan song factor would have garnered a little more interest from the public.

I think people are just fatigued with these type of storylines now. Anyway, here's how this weekend box office broke down:

Taken from boxoffice.com

#	Title	weekend		Locations		Avg.	Total	Wks.	Dist.
1	The Expendables 2	$28,750,000	--	3,316	--	$8,670	$28,750,000	1	Lionsgate
2	The Bourne Legacy	$17,020,000	-55%	3,753	8	$4,535	$69,581,080	2	Universal
3	ParaNorman	$14,008,498	--	3,429	--	$4,085	$14,008,498	1	Focus
4	The Campaign	$13,385,000	-50%	3,255	50	$4,112	$51,693,537	2	Warner Bros.
5	Sparkle (2012)	$12,000,000	--	2,244	--	$5,348	$12,000,000	1	Sony / TriStar
6	The Dark Knight Rises	$11,140,000	-41%	3,157	-533	$3,529	$409,915,911	5	Warner Bros.
7	The Odd Life of Timothy Green	$10,909,000	--	2,598	--	$4,199	$15,187,015	1	Disney
8	Hope Springs (2012)	$9,100,000	-38%	2,361	0	$3,854	$35,051,792	2	Sony / Columbia
9	Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Dog Days	$3,850,000	-52%	2,737	-664	$1,407	$38,762,321	3	Fox
10	Total Recall (2012)	$3,500,000	-56%	2,434	-1167	$1,438	$51,782,443	3	Sony / Columbia

What I find weird about this list, is that Sparkle is only being shown at 2,244 locations while the top 4 are all over 3,000. I think if Sparkle had a similar amount of locations showing it, it would definitely have come in at #2

.

Shard said:

Musicslave said:

I didn't expect it to debut @ #1 anyway. I knew Expendables would easily take the weekend. But, I didn't expect it to come in at #5 either. I thought maybe the Whitney Houston swan song factor would have garnered a little more interest from the public.

I think people are just fatigued with these type of storylines now. Anyway, here's how this weekend box office broke down:

Taken from boxoffice.com

#	Title	weekend		Locations		Avg.	Total	Wks.	Dist.
1	The Expendables 2	$28,750,000	--	3,316	--	$8,670	$28,750,000	1	Lionsgate
2	The Bourne Legacy	$17,020,000	-55%	3,753	8	$4,535	$69,581,080	2	Universal
3	ParaNorman	$14,008,498	--	3,429	--	$4,085	$14,008,498	1	Focus
4	The Campaign	$13,385,000	-50%	3,255	50	$4,112	$51,693,537	2	Warner Bros.
5	Sparkle (2012)	$12,000,000	--	2,244	--	$5,348	$12,000,000	1	Sony / TriStar
6	The Dark Knight Rises	$11,140,000	-41%	3,157	-533	$3,529	$409,915,911	5	Warner Bros.
7	The Odd Life of Timothy Green	$10,909,000	--	2,598	--	$4,199	$15,187,015	1	Disney
8	Hope Springs (2012)	$9,100,000	-38%	2,361	0	$3,854	$35,051,792	2	Sony / Columbia
9	Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Dog Days	$3,850,000	-52%	2,737	-664	$1,407	$38,762,321	3	Fox
10	Total Recall (2012)	$3,500,000	-56%	2,434	-1167	$1,438	$51,782,443	3	Sony / Columbia

What I find weird about this list, is that Sparkle is only being shown at 2,244 locations while the top 4 are all over 3,000. I think if Sparkle had a similar amount of locations showing it, it would definitely have come in at #2

.

Right, I pointed that out in an earlier post that the movie was shown at about 1000 less theaters than the top 4. If Sparkle had been shown at more theaters it probably would have come in higher than #5. Still #5 is pretty good considering it being shown at only 2244 theaters.

Shard said:

I thought it would be No. 1. Stallone movie looked crappy and still made money.

I saw it and I liked it. Don't really care if it tanks.

This was my first time seeing Whitney on the big screen, and I'll cherish it forever. I still miss that woman so much.

If you're a lover of old music, then I think you'll like this flilm. Jordin Sparks surprised me, her one performance of "One Wing" was really good, and I liked her acting as well. I think the cast did good, and I think they did the original songs justice.

I know I'm in the minority, but I saw the original and didn't like it much. It was very low-budjet and didn't make a lot of sense.

I'm a sucker for musicals though, maybe that's why I liked it.

Shard said:

Musicslave said:

I didn't expect it to debut @ #1 anyway. I knew Expendables would easily take the weekend. But, I didn't expect it to come in at #5 either. I thought maybe the Whitney Houston swan song factor would have garnered a little more interest from the public.

I think people are just fatigued with these type of storylines now. Anyway, here's how this weekend box office broke down:

Taken from boxoffice.com

#	Title	weekend		Locations		Avg.	Total	Wks.	Dist.
1	The Expendables 2	$28,750,000	--	3,316	--	$8,670	$28,750,000	1	Lionsgate
2	The Bourne Legacy	$17,020,000	-55%	3,753	8	$4,535	$69,581,080	2	Universal
3	ParaNorman	$14,008,498	--	3,429	--	$4,085	$14,008,498	1	Focus
4	The Campaign	$13,385,000	-50%	3,255	50	$4,112	$51,693,537	2	Warner Bros.
5	Sparkle (2012)	$12,000,000	--	2,244	--	$5,348	$12,000,000	1	Sony / TriStar
6	The Dark Knight Rises	$11,140,000	-41%	3,157	-533	$3,529	$409,915,911	5	Warner Bros.
7	The Odd Life of Timothy Green	$10,909,000	--	2,598	--	$4,199	$15,187,015	1	Disney
8	Hope Springs (2012)	$9,100,000	-38%	2,361	0	$3,854	$35,051,792	2	Sony / Columbia
9	Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Dog Days	$3,850,000	-52%	2,737	-664	$1,407	$38,762,321	3	Fox
10	Total Recall (2012)	$3,500,000	-56%	2,434	-1167	$1,438	$51,782,443	3	Sony / Columbia

What I find weird about this list, is that Sparkle is only being shown at 2,244 locations while the top 4 are all over 3,000. I think if Sparkle had a similar amount of locations showing it, it would definitely have come in at #2

.

But what about Think Like A Man? Wasn't that in 2,015 theaters and that opened to $33 million.

Not that 12 million is bad. I just thought this would easily open to at least 18 million.