As The Daily Wire’s Joseph Curl noted Sunday, Michael Moore’s latest anti-Republican president film, “Fahrenheit 11/9,” went “up in flames,” its box office receipts falling well below expectations and mustering less than 15% of the revenues of its blockbuster prequel, the George W. Bush take-down, “Fahrenheit 9/11.” This big disappointment comes despite left-wing critics overwhelmingly hyping the film.
Though it was expected to take in as much as $8 million, Moore’s “Fahrenheit 11/9” managed just $3.1 million over the course of its opening weekend. The film opened in 1,719 theaters, making its per-theater take just $1,804.
Moore’s film should have been helped by its strong performance among critics, which gave it a 77% “certified fresh” on Rotten Tomatoes. But the film’s audience had a less enthusiastic response, with only 57% saying they liked it.
So how did Moore’s critics-lauded anti-Trump film perform in comparison to its much-criticized counterpart, “Death of a Nation,” by conservative documentarian Dinesh D’Souza? Despite having all that critical help, Moore barely managed to beat out his competition on the right.
D’Souza’s pro-Trump “Death of a Nation” was crushed by critics, who gave it a — wait for it — 0% on Rotten Tomatoes. The audience, however, overwhelmingly liked it to the tune of 89% on the review site.
The result: despite critics burying the film, “Death of a Nation” managed to bring in just a little less than Moore’s latest docu, earning $2,356,522 in its opening weekend (Aug 2-5). D’Souza’s film only opened in 1,005 theaters, making its per-theater average $2,345 — over $500 better per theater than Moore’s film.
No wonder Variety finds itself explaining “How Michael Moore Lost His Audience.” Here’s an excerpt from the painfully honest piece:
“Fahrenheit 11/9,” his scathing riff on the administration of Donald J. Trump, will be lucky to gross one-tenth of what “Fahrenheit 9/11” did. That’s more than just a staggering comedown. It symbolizes a couple of things at once: how different the two eras are, but also how Michael Moore’s audience — there’s no other way to put it — has gradually drifted away. It symbolizes that Moore is no longer defining the dialogue. A Trump-era conservative would probably say, “It’s about time! Michael Moore has lied so much that it’s all finally caught up with him.” A Trump-era liberal would probably say, “I still agree with him, but I’ve seen enough Michael Moore movies. I know his message already.”