The movie has a relatively unknown cast and was competing against films with considerable star-power and promotional budgets larger than the entire production budget for Atlas Shrugged, and yet this 102 minute, independent project was bringing in a higher per-screen average than almost every other movie in wide distribution.
As reported by Box Office Mojo, the #1 movie in per-screen dollars was the smash ‘Rio’, averaging an impressive $10,252 per screen. ‘Atlas Shrugged’ finished 14th in overall revenue, but managed to generate $5640 per screen, making it the second-highest in overall productivity. And after the weekend, the movie is still generating a healthy $450 per screen, the second highest, daily per screen averages.
While some professional movie reviewers have not exactly been kind to this film, fans who have rated it on Fandango.com overwhelmingly support it. In fact, there are over 1000 reviews posted by people who have seen the movie and almost 80% of them have awarded it a ‘must go’ rating. Clearly there is a positive buzz from those who have paid money to see this movie versus those who are paid for their reviews.
The Blaze covered the story of Hollywood’s reticence a month ago. And last week, Pajamas Media was at the premiere, offering some reviews and interviews with cast members.
So why isn’t the movie industry doing what it normally does when an independent project manages to make it to the big screen and show the ability to generate what might be called ‘competitive’ and promising revenue numbers? This is a commodity with a proven demand. You would think that a distributor would sense there is a potential profit to be be made, not only on this film, but the planned sequels.
Is the anti-big government message just too strong?