Gullver's Travels is doing well internationally and ended the weekend with a foreign cumulative just shy of $100 million. Domestically, the film has grossed only $37.6 million.

  

Gulliver travels movie took the third spot internationally with $21 million in 39 markets , with a big debut in Russia of 9.5 million. Domestically it fell to 12th spot with 4.58 million. It is doing well internationally despite a poor performance in the US market

The opening weekend of 2011 internationally  saw  Gulliver's Travels narrowly taking the No. 1 box office spot for the first time, collecting $24 million from 4,495 venues in 33 territories.  Opening in 19 markets – all relatively small except in the U.K. and India -- Gulliver's generated most of its weekend action in the U.K. where it tallied $10.9 million  from 503 locations. It grossed a total of $47 million in 10 days of foreign release. Gulliver's Travels  opens this week in a half-dozen new territories, including Russia.

However, Gulliver's Travels continues to fare miserably  domestically, grossing $9.1 million from 3,089 locations over New Year's weekend for a cume of 27.2 million.  This bring the worldwide gross to $74.2 million.  

Gulliver's Travels   opened at a very low no. 7 on  Christmas weekend grossing  a paltry $7.2m at 2,546 locations. It averaged a mediocre $2,828 per site, for the two days ( opened on Saturday).  It also rolled out in 15 international markets and grossed an estimated $12.4 million for a global bow of $19.6 million.

Industry estimates of Gulliver's Travels' budget range from $100-120 million. With such a weak opening, it will be impossible to recoup this cost.  Typically the opening weekend for most movies accounts for a major portion of total gross. Considering that, Gulliver will have a tough time reaching $40 million in the US Box Office

Estimates are for 2 days Sat & Sun. Most Industry experts are expecting the Gulliver's Travels opening weekend to be between $10 to $12 million. This would be deadly for this movie as it cost nearly $120 million !  

• $12 million by Jabcat on movies
• $12 million by Minyanville
• $11 million Box Office Guru
  
• $10 million Los Angeles Times
  
• $10 million Box Office.com

Box Office Guru says that competition will be super tough as four of the five best-selling films from last weekend were all 3D pics with PG ratings aimed at kids and families. Black certainly has some pull with school kids so a decent showing is likely. But there are far too many choices for the target audience this weekend so a breakout debut is unlikely. Reviews have been weak, but as expected. Trailers and TV spots promise comedy and adventure so if the higher ticket prices don't scare people away, or if moviegoers remember that a 2D version at normal prices is also out there, the film could set sail with style. Opening on Saturday in around 2,400 locations.

It’s an ominous sign when a movie bounces all over the calendar. Not always — “Titantic,” for instance, had its share of rescheduled release dates, and it seems to have turned out OK.

But no one is comparing Jack Black’s “Gulliver’s Travels” to James Cameron’s disaster epic — except for maybe a sly sinking-ship reference. Black’s adventure among the Lilliputians has been pushed back to Christmas Day — its fourth release date in 2010. It was originally scheduled to open June 4, then reset for Christmas Eve. Until last week, it had been scheduled to open tomorrow.

20th Century Fox gave no explanation for the latest shift. One pundit suggested the studio was trying to give “Gulliver’s Travels” some breathing room from recent 3-D releases like “Tron: Legacy,” “Yogi Bear” and the third “Narnia” flick.

Oh, yeah; about that 3-D. ”Gulliver’s Travels” is another of those films shot in 2-D and converted to 3-D after the fact, which doesn’t bode well, either. A similar convert, “The Last Airbender,” has been one of the worst-reviewed movies of 2010.

It’s also troubling when your movie is largely CGI, and one of its stars has complained about the difficulties of green-screen acting. 

“(It is) hell, I find it really tedious and confusing — you’re like begging a tennis ball on a pole for help and crying!” Emily Blunt told “Access Hollywood.”  “I think that’s (the moment) when you’re like, ‘Oh wow. This takes a lot of imagination!’ ”

Maybe “Gulliver’s Travels” will confound expectations and land among the really short list of this year’s holiday hits. But don’t bet on it, suggests analyst Ray Subers of BoxOfficeMojo.com.

Noting that “Gulliver” could be angling to be this year’s ”Night at the Museum,” a 2006 box-office hit,  he added that “Museum” “had a more unique premise and an arguably more bankable star (Ben Stiller).”

While the phrase “more unique” makes me wince, the analysis appears to be a bit of understatement.Black, who was outstanding in “High Fidelity,” has been associated with films that made a lot of money (“King Kong,” “Tropic Thunder,” voice roles in “Kung Fu Panda,” “Ice Age” and “Shark Tale”) but he’s never had a big hit as the lead actor. ”Nacho Libre,” “School of Rock” and “Shallow Hal” did OK but failed to break the $100 million mark, while 2009′s “Year One” flopped.

Maybe “Gulliver’s Travels” will break the streak. But don’t bet on it. See original article

The tagline for Gulliver's Travels is "Something Big Is Going Down," and according to ominous tracking numbers, that thing could be the movie itself. NRG data leaked to Vulture points to an opening of only $10 to 13 million for the Jack Black family comedy, deadly for a movie that Fox insiders say cost nearly $120 million, but other sources on the production suspect is much higher. According to the survey, only 74 percent of moviegoers were aware of Gulliver’s, and only 24 percent of them expressed "definite interest" in seeing it. As the head of marketing at another studio explains, “That means disaster. Only one in four people who know about your movie want to see it.”
 
The film was directed by first-time live-action director Rob Letterman, who was behind the animated hits Monsters vs. Aliens and Shark Tale. Sources on the production tell Vulture that there was a steep learning curve in his move to real actors and a very complicated special-effects situation. Not helping matters, the neophyte director butted heads with his experienced effects supervisor, Jim Rygiel — who won the Best Visual Effects Oscar for his work on all three Lord of the Rings movies — and Letterman eventually fired him. (The director, who would not comment for this story, also went through two pairs of editors.) The film was originally slated for a summer 2010 release; while our sources tell us that Letterman's inexperience led to the delay, a Fox insider maintains that the studio made the decision to bump it to Christmas way back in July 2009, after the Night at the Museumsequel opened in May and grossed $177.2 million: respectable, but $73 million less than the first NATM, which opened in the 2006 Christmas season.

Also working against Gulliver's is the fact that it's opening right on Christmas Day, a Saturday, which means it only has eight days to try to recoup the bulk of its price tag before kids go back to school. Meanwhile, Little Fockers opens three days earlier, on Wednesday, and is also tracking much better: 43 percent definite interest to Gulliver's 24 percent. And while Fockers is the first choice of 16 percent of moviegoers, Gulliver’s is the first choice of just 3 percent. Can Fox avoid taking what experts say will likely be a $100 million write-down on its Black comedy? The odds of it doing so look to be Lilliputian. See the original article here