‘Home’ Occupies Top Spot At UK Box Office

home_international

Ahead of its American debut, DreamWorks Animation’s Home, which will be the studio’s sole theatrical release in 2015, launched in nine territories with a solid $19.2 million.

Home’s strongest market was the Cinderella-less United Kingdom where it opened in first place with $9.3 million. While that figure lags behind the UK wide-release of DreamWorks’s How to Train Your Dragon 2, which netted $13.3M in a weekend, it’s significantly better than Penguins of Madagascar, which had a soft $2.5M bow in the market last December.

Home also debuted in the top spot in Russia ($4.2M) and Spain ($2.4M), and in second place in Australia ($2.3M). The Tim Johnson-directed Home expands into over 50 territories this week including North America.

cinderella

In the United States, with the grittier heroine of the YA dystopian franchise sequel Insurgent taking the spotlight in cinemas this weekend, Disney’s Cinderella has slipped to a respectable second spot in its second frame, making an estimated $34.5 million overall and bringing the domestic total to an estimated $122 million.

In the context of Disney’s remakes and reimaginings, the 49.2% drop is nearly the same as Maleficent’s second-weekend drop last year of 50.6%. Alice in Wonderland and Oz the Great and Powerful dropped 46% and 47.9% in their second weekends, respectively.

Another consideration for the calculus: Maleficent’s revisionist take on Sleeping Beauty had a production budget of $180 million; Kenneth Branagh’s decidedly non-revisionist Cinderella had a comparatively lean $95 million. (Alice in Wonderland and Oz the Great and Powerful cost $200 million and $215 million, respectively.)

Cinderella’s foreign total currently sits at $131 million (including $52.4 million from China), with a worldwide total of $253 million.

Meanwhile, Paramount Animation’s The SpongeBob Movie: Sponge Out of Water is continuing to prove highly absorbent in 10th position with $2.4 million in its 7th U.S. weekend and a $158.8 million domestic total. Internationally, it has earned $121.2 million, lifting its global take to $280 million.


  • U wot m8

    Good for them! I don’t see why its getting terrible reviews! Its an enjoyable film! Not dreamworks best,KFP 1 and 2 and HTTYD 1 and 2 are far better, but this is a really enjoyable movie! Id give it 3 out of 5 stars!

  • Lew

    I honestly think the “trailers” are doing a disservice to the movie.

    • Ravlic

      If you mean that they accurately represent the quality of the film, then yes.

      • Lew

        No, they don’t.
        Sure it has some typical Dreamworks “jokes”, but few and far between…was MUCH better than I expected.

        • Ravlic

          Let’s see:

          The trailer shows us this movie will be unimaginative and predictable, basically another forgettable generic DW comedy.
          The reviews for this film are calling it unimaginative and predictable, basically another forgettable generic DW comedy.

          And when the defenders for this movie can at best say “well, kids will like it at least” I’m pretty damn sure we’re not looking at a case underappreciation here.
          It has 45% on RT. It has 47 on Metacritic. Can you seriously look me in my empty anon face and tell me this movie has something going for it that all those people missed? That there’s some hidden, unappreciated magic that went over everyone’s heads? Can you really?

          • maddie

            I went to a pre-screening of this movie with low expectations. It is a good movie. It’s not groundbreaking, but it is very enjoyable and has a solid plot. I would see it again, which I can’t about a couple of other recent DW releases.

  • ScamScum

    This always happens. Just when they make an amazing film like HTTYD2, they follow up with a dud like Home.

  • leoncor

    Is it crazy to assume that Rihanna may have some effect on the film’s reception in the UK? For some reason she’s HUGE over there.

  • Strong Enough

    i would love to get a glimpse inside a story artist meeting at dreamworks

    • norbert

      You mean the meetings the story artists aren’t invited to?

      • Strong Enough

        does dreamworks even have story artists at this rate?

  • Toonio

    Funny how Rihanna being a singer and such, comes across so flat as a voice actress.on Happy smeckday.

  • U wot m8

    C level films are worth watching to me.

    • once_upon_a_DreamWorks

      I did not say I’d not watch it – just that I’d not spend the price of a theater ticket on it. It’ll be on HBO is a few months, I can wait.

  • U wot m8

    I Really hope they don’t go with trolls, boss baby, and dinotrux. They need more things like HTTYD and Kung fu panda. They just need to stop making movies based off book (besides HTTYD which is amazing)

    • Jax

      Trolls and Boss Baby are already in production, and Dinotrux is gonna be a Netflix show.

    • Ravlic

      They do need more HTTYD and KFP. I really don’t know who in their right mind greenlit Turbo and it just went downhill from there. They need to stop making projects that are doomed to fail from just the premise itself.
      If they were some cheap amateur company I wouldn’t bat an eye, but the worst thing is that they’re capable of making really solid stuff and for some bizzare reason they keep taking embarrassing ideas the likes of Hot Stuff and Captain Underpants.

    • Nicky

      Boss Baby sounds terrible

      • Ravlic

        Boss Baby sounds like DW got jealous of Baby Geniuses’ rating.

  • L_Ron_Hoover

    Why should a “cute kids movies” be spared from being criticized or panned? This is still a $132 million dollar feature film that was made by hundreds of talented, experienced artists. I agree that Rotten Tomatoes can be ridiculous but Dreamworks animated movies are not dumb kids movies cranked out by talentless executives. The studio has expectations to make quality animation and story writing.

    And no, nobody is going into “Home” expecting it to be on par with “Citizen Kane.” I get your joke but many reviews are not irrational. They are disappointed in the story cliches, weak characters, safe humor, pop-culture references, and over-all unoriginality. Those are legitimate criticisms.

    Anyways, I haven’t seen “Home” yet but I suggest to those who want to see Dreamworks Animation survive, go support them and see the film in theaters. If you’re uninterested in sitting through it then just buy the ticket and see some other movie.

    • Lew

      LOL, “I haven’t seen Home yet.”

      Thanks for your clear review of the film.

  • Maggiemay

    The sins of this nation shall be paid for with mediocre animation.

  • Jay

    Honestly, while I love critiquing animated film, even if people don’t think this movie is on par with others, an animated film with a black girl as a lead is not something we get very often, and representation like this is what we need more on a social level too? Media is so important for that sort of thing. For example, when I saw Annie, I had a few criticisms, but over all the fact that the movie existed as it did at all was much more important than a few things I didn’t like. So, I’m really happy that Home is doing well so far.

    • L_Ron_Hoover

      I have no clue if it’s just the obliviousness of this new generation but we’ve done this sort of thing before. Ever since the 90s, Nickelodeon, Nick Jr, Disney, Cartoon Network, PBS, FOX Kids, etc. have been making live-action/animated media starring minorities.

      Little Bill, Kenan and Kel, Class of 3000, All That, Dora, Go Deigo, Brothers Garcia, Cousin Skeeter, Ghostwriter, Hi Hi Puffy Amiyumi, Sanjay and Craig, Life and Times of Juniper Lee, Justice League, Total Drama, Samurai Jack, El Tigre, Korra, Avatar, My Brother and Me, Victorious, Gullah Gullah Island, American Dragon Jake Long, The Proud Family (I can keep going here…)

      I didn’t even include any films and I also didn’t include shows that star mixed races. Society changes on its own, not because of what is on television. There is no proven scientific link between the two.

  • Arch Stanton

    I saw it at a preview here in the UK. I’m struggling to remember much about it. The animation was nice, the songs didn’t work. And the story was incredibly pedestrian. It’s very similar to lilo and snitch but without the charm. It’s more like one of those low budget European pixar l wannabees than a 130 million dollar blockbuster.

  • M.

    You seem to know more than the rest of us. Last I checked, there doesn’t seem to be any proof that these upcoming titles are “awful”.

    • Ravlic

      If you see a person slipping on a banana-peel, will you assume they’re going to fall, or do you assume every time they’ll do a ridiculous backflip and land on their hands to a loud applause?

      • M.

        So in your example, are the upcoming DW film titles the banana peels, or their individual premises, or what exactly? Regardless, the analogy is considerably weak. A working title like those mentioned above generally only tells us at most a rough idea for a film. Even in the case of a project based on already existing material, we still don’t know the full direction the filmmakers will go (compare the film “HTTYD” to the books). I think we’ve all been surprised before. Personally speaking, “The Lego Movie” and “Finding Nemo” were much better than I initially expected when each was first announced. So when premises for movies like “Peanuts”, “The Good Dinosaur”, and “Zootopia” are revealed, I typically try not to automatically write them off.

        • Ravlic

          I am actually not surprised you didn’t get the analogy considering we’re talking stuff that isn’t spelled-out in advance here.

          I could’ve told you Home will be bad, as well as Turbo. You can come back to me once Boss Baby comes out and Captain Underpants and they suck too, I’ll write you a nice big “told you so” and you’ll either feel gullible for thinking these movies would be good or you’ll be amazed at my prophetic abilities. But there’s nothing supernatural in them, I assure you, it usually comes down to a simple formula:
          *overall creativity
          *competence of studio
          *non-genericness of plot
          Score two strikes on these, your chances are already extremely low. Strike three, your film is as good as dead. Now, you can pretend that every bad incoming movie is going to be a masterpiece and waste your time on every one of them but, as I said, this is akin to expecting a person who tripped to end up in a handstand.

          And Nemo? Did you think Wall-E would be bad too? Out of the films you mentioned, only The Good Dinosaur looks like it will be bad.

          • M.

            My initial stance on Nemo was because the first teaser bored me. The idea sounded lackluster and out-of-step with Pixar’s prior track record. Upon seeing it, I knew I was wrong. Good titles, teasers, premises, and marketing are important tools to generate interest for films. A solid track record certainly helps. However, my experiences with Nemo and Lego both taught me to not be so quick to pronounce a film dead. If you end up beig right, Ravlic, then you’re right. But I won’t be dumbfounded nor congratulatory because this isn’t a competition. I truly hope the best for each of these films and find it frankly premature, pointless, and hyperbolic to make the assumptions you claim.

  • http://craaaaazycanuck.tumblr.com John McBloom

    ”That is until Sponge Out of Water was released in the UK…”

  • L_Ron_Hoover

    Correction, “weak” people’s impressions change based on what they see in the media. If you are so easily manipulated to change your world view or judgment based on what you’re watching then you probably aren’t very strong-minded. Even so, if you are a dedicated follower of “the media” then you would know that there is no permanent “fix.” Why? Because it’s a trend, the media is constantly changing (not exactly evolving) based on what are popular ideals. And a trend is not a societal change, it’s a temporary fad that disappears…much like “the love generation.”

    Pretty much every band, artist, protestor, and propaganda artist in the late sixties had an agenda for “world peace.” It changed nothing and in fact, it created a counter-culture that led to punk, shock rock, heavy metal, and yuppies that made the previous movement redundant. So, how did the media change society? It didn’t really. It was no more of a change than a teenager going through a phase.

    It’s really up to debate whether or not the media actually has an important effect on the world. Again, does preaching “peace and love” actually create peace and love? If that were true then why is it that a majority of the top hit singles over the past 70 years have been love songs yet we don’t all love each other? I’ll wait for that day but as we see again and again, history has proven that society only changes naturally (“on its own.”)

    I’m sure it’s your well-intention when aiming for diversity by emphasizing race, ethnicity, and gender but the problem with this solution is that it’s based on the same assumption as the original “white, male leads” problem. The better solution is to just focus on making good content.

    • Ravlic

      Ah yes, “only weak people are affected by society”, what a naively idealistic statement. I’m afraid I, or people with any degree of education in social studies (which I’d recommend you look into) don’t agree. Yeah, it sounds nice and very American, this idea that I am a perfect little snowflake who’s above any influence that could corrupt my innate individuality. It’d be lovely if that were true, I’d love it if this were true, but I’m afraid I just don’t have the ego to believe it.

      And making good content, well, that works perfectly when that, or bad content as well, all content actually, centers only around you all the time. Good for you, I guess. But, here’s a shocker, you can make good content or bad content with something other than the white male lead in it. Yes, one doesn’t exclude the other.
      And really, love songs? Love songs are popular because everyone enters relationships and they can relate to them. So, over the past 70 years we do all love each other, that’s why love songs are popular. Just because society changes doesn’t in any way negate the fact that it changes under influence. People seek new things, a new thing embraced by a generation is old to the next generation, which in turn seeks to distance itself with something different or counter to it. But I’d say there’s a difference between finding new types of entertainment and trying to fix the limiting, backwards, annoying double standards that have been plaguing the industry for decades and which have shown 0 improvement on their own. To paraphrase a certain artist for the most popular game currently “How could you tell they’re female if you didn’t see their breasts?” who has since had to change his attitude. But I’m sure that view of women is very uncommon and in no way propagated by the media.

      Now maybe it’s my idealism but I guess I just find it hard to believe there’s some strange hate gene that sporadically takes control of society and a number of American generations were born inherently believing blacks are inferior ape-like beings, that men were just born believing that women are passive childish things of inferior intelligence or that Germans were all just born thinking their country needs to rule the world and that Jews should be exterminated. Call it just a hunch, but maybe there’s more than just one giant absurdly improbable alignment of snowflakes that’s making up the human masses, which have time and time again shown to be susceptible to influence.

      • L_Ron_Hoover

        I believe you half-paid attention to what I wrote and quickly made up your response before reading what I had to say…Our two posts have almost nothing to do with one another. Surprised this got approved.

  • L_Ron_Hoover

    Where did this conspiracy come from that this is how studios think? There are plenty of films over the past 50 something years starring minorities that have flopped yet we still have minority leads in films to this day.

    I’m really curious about what research you’ve done that proves this. It also sounds like you’re a tad too focused on race to think that is what everyone must be thinking about when they see “Home.” Also, I’m pretty sure none of the “poor reviews” talk about how the lead character shouldn’t have been a black girl…

  • Ravlic

    Well call me crazy, but the majority of the US is white. Of course the majority of lead characters are going to be white as well. It’s like complaining that the majority of lead characters are not invalids.

    • Nina

      Demographics aside, what I am complaining about is the fact that film and TV studios seem to think that stories about white people are the only ones worth telling, when 99% of the time, a character’s skin colour is not an important component of a narrative. You could easily swap a lot of white characters on TV or in films for ones of colour, and I can guarantee that the stories would play out in the exact same way.

      • L_Ron_Hoover

        That’s completely not true about studios and also about swapping races. If anything, people avoid the use of minorities and women in shows because of the sensitivity surrounding those two groups. You have to censor and avoid many subjects that could accidentally “imply” something when it comes to discussing anyone who isn’t white or male.

        Having to remove/avoid certain props, food dishes, names, designs, personalities, voices, accents, body shapes, clothing, etc. It’s all so much effort that you end up with a watered down, realistic character. It’s too hard to make a cartoon starring a character that is so bland and/or preachy. In contrast, society certainly allows open season on white male characters (not that I’m complaining.)

        For example: You can have a dumb dad and a smart mom but to switch those roles would be deemed “offensive.” You can have a group of urban black characters and a totally clueless white character but you can’t switch the roles. You can have cartoons make stereotypes of Italian mobsters but you can’t have a Mexican gangster or a black thug without offending someone. These are tropes but for obvious reasons. The writers/creators/executives are just following the rules of what society allows for. Art reflects society.

        If you want to see more females and minority leads then the sensitivity surrounding those topics has to be more forgiving.

  • L_Ron_Hoover

    It’s so hard to address what you’re saying because you are so sure that this factual and not at all speculation. Your tunnel vision has blinded you from seeing the reality. Yes, I’m sure there is racism in Hollywood; there are racists everywhere in this world white and non-white, it’s a thing that has and will always exist. But to say that Hollywood itself is racist or mostly racist and that a trope for black leads specifically is that they are “oppressed” clearly shows that you are very ignorant.

    First of all, the movies you listed are historically accurate or bio pictures that specifically focus on hardships in black culture. I’m sorry if it’s news to you but throughout most of us history blacks have been oppressed. Hollywood tends to release a lot of period pieces, and it would be quite offensive to fabricate blacks as free people while completely ignoring all the poverty and that whole slavery thing throughout their entire American history. (They’re basically white people, right?)

    The other thing is that society doesn’t really allow Hollywood to do much with non-white and/or non-male characters. It’s because of people like yourself who speculate and over-analyze film way past the point of intention. You keep going until you’ve completely misinterpreted something as “racist” or “sexist.” It’s too risky (unless it’s made by a crew of all minorities.)

    Seriously, read some of the recent headlines about artists getting demonized by social justice groups and third wave feminists. Internet mob mentality is underratedly powerful. Ask yourself “Why would someone be afraid to make something starring a character who is female or non-white? Why are the characters that get passed usually very bland and boring?” It’s because publishers usually try to avoid lawsuits after accidentally offending a group. They pander to the politically correct crowd and you’re left with what’s ‘safe’ and thus uninspired. We see it pretty much every single day.

    Of course I’m not saying “Keep doing that thing with the girls who have big breasts and thin waistlines!” or “Make sure the black guy character grew up without a father and is somewhat of a criminal!” I guess what I’m saying is that society needs to hold less of a double standard (if that phrase turns you off, sorry) when it comes to character liberty. Society allows me to do literally do ANYTHING with a white male character…but I can do much less with a female or a minority.