Sure, for the most part, the liberal mythos has its way with the truth throughout the picture. This is still a Hollywood film, after all. Nixon gets no credit for helping to expose Communist infiltration in American government, or for stopping the spread of Communism in Asia through his hard line war policies. The left takes no responsibility for the millions of murders brought about by the coming of “peace.” And, of course, we hear that the slaughter-happy Khmer Rouge was a creation of American policy: that comforting old leftist nursery story that no evil exists except when we make it—so if we’re very, very good, the bad men won’t hurt us.

But never mind. At the center of Frost/Nixon is a warning that every conservative should heed. Nixon committed the crimes and follies of Watergate—and abased himself in front of Frost—because he made a terrible mistake. He cared what the left thought about him. He wanted the Ivy League intellectuals and the New York Times and the Camelot Pretenders to like him. He respected their opinion. It was truly his tragic flaw. If he had only known, really known in his heart, that, for all their education and sophistication, they are nothing but high-toned rascals and humbugs more concerned with their own sense of virtue than with virtue itself, he might have done what Reagan did: treated them with the blithe indifference they deserve while acting on his principles with courage and joy.

Instead, he feared their contempt and therefore hated them, as a man always hates the people he fears. And as he himself said, “Those who hate you don’t win unless you hate them. And then you destroy yourself.” We should keep that in mind while dealing with the current crop of what, for lack of a word more accurate and yet still printable, I will call journalists.

But, in the world of gambling, you always want to look for value. What are the films and performances with longer odds that would be worth a wager on Sunday? My purpose here is to establish a betting line for each of the six major categories, and then find the value bet in each category.

Question: Who will win Best Picture? Answer: Still, SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE

BEST PICTURE
Slumdog Millionaire – 1/7
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button – 6/1
Milk – 20/1
Frost/Nixon – 30/1
The Reader – 50/1

VALUE: I believe that in order to win an Academy Award, passion is required. Slumdog Millionaire has a passionate zeal among its supporters that will make it virtually unbeatable. Although I have made The Curious Case of Benjamin Button the second choice here, I give it very little chance of winning. It has major studio backing (Paramount), and it is certainly well-respected, but it is more admired than loved. So, for me the betting value is in Milk. Aside from Slumdog, it is the movie with the largest bloc of zealous fans. Gay and gay-friendly Academy members love the movie, and in the shadow of the passage of Proposition 8 in California, Milk is worth a $2 bet at the window.

Sean Penn's portrayal of Harvey Milk is now a decided underdog to Mickey Rourke

BEST ACTOR
Mickey Rourke, The Wrestler – 1/2
Sean Penn, Milk – 3/2
Frank Langella, Frost/Nixon – 10/1
Brad Pitt, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button – 25/1
Richard Jenkins, The Visitor – 35/1

VALUE: After colorful, rambling, verging on obscene acceptance speeches at both the Golden Globes and the BAFTA Awards, Mickey Rourke is the true favorite for Best Actor. Rourke has also campaigned hard, paying the paying the price for that Golden Globe win by schmoozing each and every one of those 95 Hollywood Foreign Press members. Penn just doesn’t play that awards campaign game at all, but actors love him. The only real betting value here is Penn, who still has a chance of winning his second Oscar.

It has been 25 years since Mery Streep won an Oscar

BEST ACTRESS
Kate Winslet, The Reader – 1/2
Meryl Streep, Doubt – 5/2
Anne Hathaway, Rachel Getting Married – 4/1
Angelina Jolie, Changeling – 25/1
Melissa Leo, Frozen River – 35/1

VALUE: It is Kate Winslet’s year. Just ask anybody. She has two outstanding awards-caliber performances in The Reader and Revolutionary Road. If rules would have allowed, she might have been nominated twice in the Best Actress category. She’s 0-fer-5 lifetime at the Academy Awards and deserves to win, but she can be beaten. Jolie and Leo have no shot. Hathaway is the 3rd choice in the field, and a win is not inconceivable, but Streep is the value bet. The undisputed greatest living actress has not won an Oscar in 25 years, despite the fact that this is her eleventh nomination since winning for Sophie’s Choice in 1983.

Ledger is a lock

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Heather Ledger, The Dark Knight – 1/100
Josh Brolin, Milk – 20/1
Robert Downey, Jr., Tropic Thunder – 25/1
Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Doubt – 30/1
Michael Shannon, Revolutionary Road – 50/1

VALUE: None. There is no value in this category. Heath Ledger will win Best Supporting Actor posthumously. If you are unfamiliar with how odds work, 1/100 means that you would have to bet $100 to win just $1, and even then, it would be tough to get anybody to take your wager.

Marisa Tomei's "stripper with a heart of gold" in THE WRESTLER may earn her a second Oscar

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Penelope Cruz, Vicky Cristina Barcelona – 1/2
Viola Davis, Doubt – 3/1
Marisa Tomei, The Wrestler – 5/1
Amy Adams, Doubt – 12/1
Taraji P. Henson, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button – 15/1

VALUE: This is, by far, the most competitive of the major awards. The longest shot in the field, Taraji P. Henson from Ben Button, is only a 15-1 longshot. Woody Allen has a knack for helping actresses win in this category (ask Dianne Wiest , who scored for both Hannah and Her Sisters and Bullets Over Broadway). That points to a win for Penelope Cruz, who was raw and sexy as Maria Elena in Vicky Cristina Barcelona. Davis can certainly win for her fleeting-but-powerful turn in Doubt, but my value bet is Marisa Tomei. Her first win, for My Cousin Vinny, was viewed by many as a fluke. In fact, there is an urban legend that she really didn’t win. The story goes that Jack Palance, who presented that year, read the wrong name (the legend claims that Vanessa Redgrave was the actual winner for Howard’s End). In reality, there is no doubt that Tomei is an Oscar winning actress, who gives her career-best performance in The Wrestler.

The uncompromising David Fincher

BEST DIRECTOR
Danny Boyle, Slumdog Millionaire – 1/7
David Fincher, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button – 6/1
Gus Van Sant, Milk – 20/1
Ron Howard, Frost/Nixon – 25/1
Stephen Daldry, The Reader – 35/1

VALUE: Nobody is going to beat Danny Boyle, but if I was looking for a strong value bet, I would wager on Fincher. He is a visionary with some amazing movies on his resume, including Se7en, Fight Club and Zodiac. He has worked with countless actors and industry types, and his uncompromising nature makes him tough to like, but easy to respect. If there were an upset in this category, Fincher is the only guy who could pull it off.

Steve Mason is on Facebook and now also on Twitter.

Introduction:

In a sense, son-in-law Edward Cox was mistaken when he told President Nixon shortly before his 1974 resignation that doing so would not stop the onslaught.

You don’t know these people. I know them. Let me tell you something about them. I worked in the US Attorney’s Office in New York. And I went to school with some of these people. They’re tough. They’re smart. But, most of all, they hate you with a passion. Most because of the war, and some because of other reasons. And they and others like them, and the press, they’re going to hound you. They’re going to harass you for the rest of your life.

Nixon died in 1994, almost fifteen years ago, but even his death did not stop the onslaught from those radicalized by their opposition to the Vietnam War… The “Frost/Nixon” movie is the latest ad hominem attack.

Being the only President to have resigned, there is a gracious plenty of wrongdoing involved in Watergate that could still be explored—but the misrepresentations and sheer inventions from Producer Ron Howard, Playwright Peter Morgan and Consultant James Reston, Jr. reach a new low in political revisionism.

I call them ‘lies, damn lies, and dramatizations,’ but they raise the essential question of how much the truth can be shaved in film making without becoming outright propaganda.

Given Hollywood’s lingering hatred of Richard Nixon, such questions seem irrelevant—and it should come as no surprise that that “Frost/Nixon” has been nominated for five Academy Awards: Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Director, Best Adapted Screenplay and Best Film Editing.

Background:

The movie is a dramatization about the taping of almost thirty hours of interviews done by British TV host David Frost with former President Richard Nixon, with the help of Frost’s two researchers, Bob Zelnick and James Reston, Jr. The edited version—four ninety minute segments–was broadcast in 1977 to great critical acclaim and drew the then-largest worldwide audience for a news interview—with an estimated forty-six million viewers in America alone.

The movie’s difficulty is that from Nixon’s furtive glance after giving the victory sign as he boarded the helicopter on the day of his resignation to the vignette about the Gucci loafers, its most dramatic moments bear little resemblance to what actually happened during the interviews themselves. How can we know this for sure? For those caring to look, there are three primary sources—all prepared by Frost or one of his researchers.

First, a DVD exists of the actual broadcasts, issued in Great Britain with an afterword by Sir David Frost. While readily available, apparently none of the movie’s reviewers saw fit to view the actual broadcast, since they show that time and again the movie version alters, omits or improperly edits what was actually said by Nixon and by Frost.

Second, there Frost’s own book, published in 1978 and entitled, “I Gave Them a Sword”: Behind the Scenes of the Nixon Interviews. As the inside scoop on ‘the story behind the story’, at least from Frost’s point of view, anything of significance not actually contained in the taped interviews themselves would surely have been mentioned in his 320 page book.

Finally, there is the 181 page booklet by James Reston, Jr. that was published in 2007. Entitled, “The Conviction of Richard Nixon, The Untold Story of the Frost/Nixon Interviews,” it attempts—albeit some thirty years later—a rather audacious historical re-write designed to show how he (and he alone) brought Nixon down by discovering an unknown tape recording whose last minute use by Frost was not only the ‘gotcha moment’ in the interviews, but proves Nixon was at the center of the Watergate cover-up.

The booklet was hardly a critical success—and Reston’s claim so patently absurd as to be dismissed entirely– but for one reader: Peter Morgan, who based his stage play on Reston’s version of events. Reston—and not Frost—also is the one on whom Ron Howard relied for any historic accuracy in the movie. As we shall see, their reliance was entirely misplaced.

While the movie fairly portrays the Frost team’s extensive preparations and his two researchers’ massive disappointment in Frost’s seeming inability to nail Nixon on either foreign or domestic initiatives of his presidency, its portrayal of Nixon’s actions and statements is patently fraudulent.

Fortunately, while awaiting announcement of the Academy Awards, we can review what was actually filmed or written by the very people on Frost’s team that appear in the movie—and contrast that to the movie’s version of events. This is not a situation of being faced with competing claims from Nixon supporters; it is an exercise in comparing what Frost said happened then—and what people have been filmed as saying in the movie.

Specifics:

At least three participants are unfairly maligned in “Frost/Nixon”: David Frost, who is portrayed as a washed up, witless dandy; Jack Brennan, Nixon’s aide-de-camp, who is cast the heavyweight protecting Nixon from himself; and former President Nixon, who is portrayed by Frank Langella as doing and saying things Nixon simply did not do or say.

Let us begin with a simple example: The movie would have us believe that David Frost picked up Caroline Cushing on his flight to California by offering to include her in his first meeting with Nixon, scheduled for the very next day. In his book, Frost carefully details that first meeting, naming all participants–without any mention of Cushing. Yet he does mention her appearance and participation in several other events. A harmless dramatization? A little white lie just to show where Frost’s interests really lay? Perhaps, but factually incorrect and a substantial disservice to both Frost and Cushing.

Another dramatization has to do with the Gucci loafers worn by Frost and commented upon by Nixon. The movie ends with Frost giving Nixon a pair as a gift—apparently oblivious to the fact that Nixon disdained them as effeminate. Isn’t it intriguing that this little vignette—which provides such clear insight into the personalities of both Nixon and Frost–is nowhere mentioned in Frost’s own book? Oh, it could have happened—but it didn’t. The Gucci loafer scenes are a complete and knowing fabrication.

Aside from such dramatizations, there are far more serious breaches of historic accuracy, including:

• Interview Payment: Frost not only paid Nixon $600,000 for the interviews (as claimed), he also promised him twenty percent of the profits—an omitted fact that shows the project was more of a joint venture between Nixon and Frost. For the most part, they were not adversaries; they had a common interest in the interviews being acclaimed and widely distributed.

• Unsettling Pre-Interview Questions: The claimed pattern of Nixon asking Frost seemingly innocent but deliberately unsettling questions as each taping session was about to begin continues this deliberate misrepresentation: by and large, the interviews were not an adversarial proceeding.

• Opening Question: While the opening question (about why Nixon did not destroy the tapes) did indeed occur, Frost’s book notes that he had informed Jack Brennan of his intent and obtained Brennan’s concurrence before that morning’s filming began—so Nixon was hardly surprised at the question–and no doubt agreed it would heighten viewer interest.

• “Well, when the President does it, that means that it is not illegal”: Nixon actually made this statement during their interview, but it was in the context of why members of any administration should not have to worry about being indicted by a later administration based upon a differing legal interpretation. While others might disagree, this is precisely the point the outgoing Bush administration would make about their aggressive questioning of certain terrorists (i.e.: waterboarding): If done under presidential order after full legal review, those carrying out the instruction should not be subject to second-guessing—or government employees could never feel safe in carrying out presidential directives. The movie’s treatment is a deliberate and substantive misrepresentation.

• Brennan’s Threat to Ruin Frost: Brennan made the statement, but in the context of improper editing (where Nixon’s responses might be omitted) and not with regard to any questioning about Watergate. In fact, Frost characterizes their exchange as sort of an informal compact that he would fairly present Nixon’s accomplishments and they would not try to stonewall questions about Watergate.

• Midnight Phone Call: Among the most dramatic moments of the film is Nixon’s late night call to Frost, supposedly after having too much to drink—surely a poignant moment where Nixon reveals his inner torments. Since no mention whatsoever of this call is made in Frost’s book, we can only conclude it to be another complete and deliberate fabrication.

• Brennan Interruption: Another telling and dramatic movie moment occurs as Nixon (purportedly) is about to confess to the crimes of Watergate and Brennan deliberately invades the set to interrupt the proceedings. In truth—as written by Frost himself—Brennan merely held up a sign saying, “Let him talk”, and it was Frost himself who decided to call for a time out in the filming—by telling Nixon they needed time to change tapes–with the intent of enabling Nixon to collect his thoughts before proceeding. Frost details his following discussion with Brennan, but makes no mention whatever of Brennan then counseling Nixon in private.

• Nixon “Confession”: In the movie version, Nixon is caught by his own words on the tapes and confesses to being a part of the Watergate cover-up. But his words from those interviews were changed in the movie version. What Nixon did (which was most appropriate) was to apologize to the Nation for his mistakes during Watergate—rather a distinct difference. Frost’s book details how everyone—on both teams—seemed pleased with their Watergate exchange. Indeed, even the 1977 DVD cover blurb characterizes that part of the interview as, “culminating in the unprecedented sight of a president apologizing to his people.”

• Farewell Meeting: The movie ends with Frost calling upon Nixon in his San Clemente home following the broadcasts and that Nixon, dressed in shirt sleeves and musing about golfing in retirement, implies that he had been unmasked and undone. In contrast, Frost wrote that he had met with Nixon for their final time in his office just after the second program on foreign policy had been broadcast [i.e.: before any broadcast of their Watergate segment]–so no such observations by Nixon could have occurred. There is no mention of shirt sleeves, only an allusion to Nixon’s staff always being careful to wear coats and ties when entering his office. By then, Nixon was hard at work on his Memoirs, the second of the ten books he would write. While Frost doesn’t dare say so, it is even possible they congratulated each other on the apparent success of their venture.

Conclusion:

What are we to make of all this—a movie whose portrayal of Nixon is so biased and based on such sheer invention as to be meaningless? A conservative producer could make a movie about any of the last three Democratic presidents—and portray Bill Clinton as a philandering lightweight, Jimmy Carter as the most inept president of our lifetime, or Lyndon Johnson as a bullying, intemperate redneck. But if their film changed the words and actions of actual events to ‘prove’ their version of these leader’s souls, there would be adverse editorial comment and public reaction—as there was when this was tried with Ronald Reagan and the public outcry led to cancellation of the planned broadcast.

The Frost interviews were (and still are) mesmerizing—but they show something entirely different from the movie’s version: They show Frost probing and Nixon responding, defending his decisions and his administration. He is and remains the dominant foreign affairs president of our lifetime: Detente with Russia, the opening to China, ending the Vietnam War—all remain accomplishments of great magnitude. His domestic agenda, forged with a Congress dominated by the opposing party, shows a creativity and innovation unsurpassed by subsequent administrations. Watergate, of course, overshadows all else, but recent revelations about the true identity of Deep Throat, about the conduct of Judge John Sirica, and about the complex roles played by John Dean may yet lead to a different interpretation of those historic events.

But the Left’s residual hatred of Richard Nixon has no bounds and we are left with a movie based on the terrifically biased version by a junior researcher, basking in his fifteen minutes of fame. “Frost/Nixon” contains great acting to be sure, but the factual basis of its most telling moments is virtually non-existent.

Are Academy Awards given out on the basis of how evil some wish our thirty-seventh president to have been? We shall have to wait and see—but the American people have a right to ask how this movie could have been produced, promoted and reviewed without anyone pointing out how much of it is merely a fictionalized version of events.

The Adam Sandler-produced comedy has broadened its audience, showing real family appeal. That led to stronger Saturday and Sunday matinees for a stellar $21.5M by Monday morning. That gives the movie a 10-day cume of just shy of $65M, which is impressive considering that it was budgeted at just $26M. After success as a supporting star in movies like Hitch ($179.5M cume) and I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry ($120M cume), it appears that James can open a movie without the help of Will Smith and Adam Sandler. Mall Cop dipped only 32% from last Friday-thru-Sunday (and that was part of a 4-day weekend, which can often lead to a sharper drop).

My Friday night projection column had Underworld: Rise of the Lycans as the #1 movie with $19.75M, and the picture actually improved on that number, finishing with an estimated $20.7M. The Patrick Tatopolous-directed prequel starring Michael Sheen (currently seen as David Frost in Best Picture nominee Frost/Nixon), but the movie finished with less than the original 2003 Underworld ($21.75M) and Underworld: Evolution’s $26.85M in 2006.

The missing ingredient would seem to be the very sexy Kate Beckinsale, who starred in the first two movies in skintight leather. Rise of the Lycans cost about $35M to make, so this picture will make money for Sony. The picture skewed very male (only 41% of the audience was female), but the surprise is that it also drew an older audience. In fact, only 45% of ticket-buyers were under 25.

Oscar voters were not friendly to Clint Eastwood this week. After scoring surprise nominations (Letters From Iwo Jima) and wins (Million Dollar Baby) in recent years, the screen icon was completely shut out on Thursday. No Best Actor nod for Gran Torino (Warner Bros). No Best Director nomination for either of his two well-received 2008 movies Gran Torino or Changeling. No nominations for composing the scores for either of those movies. Clint didn’t even receive a Best Original Song nomination for the haunting and heartfelt theme song from Gran Torino that he co-wrote with son Kyle and jazz vocalist Jamie Cullum.

Instead of an Oscar, Eastwood will settle for a blockbuster hit. Gran Torino, in which he plays a bigoted Korean War veteran who befriends a Hmong boy in a rough Detroit neighborhood, scored another $16M, down only 27% from the MLK 3-day. The micro-budgeted movie by a first-time screenwriter has now grossed a staggering $97.57M, and, sometime on Wednesday, it will surpass In the Line of Fire’s $102.3M, becoming Eastwood’s al-time #1 grossing movie.

The fourth-place finisher for the frame is the live action dog movie Hotel For Dogs (Dreamworks/Paramount), which fetched about $12.36M for a new 19-day cume of almost $37M.

Meanwhile, 10 Academy Award nominations have propelled Slumdog Millionaire to a wildly successful expansion. Widening to 1,411 playdates, Fox Searchlight has perfectly calibrated the platform release and coaxed a terrific $10.55M. It’s hard to believe that after being developed by the now-defunct Warner Independent Pictures, this $14M indie almost wound up going straight-to-video. Now Danny Boyle’s life-affirming masterpiece will have grossed almost $56M by Monday, and Slumdog will be selling a lot more tickets between now and Oscar day.

The other major studio release is Inkheart, which is the product of New Line (absorbed last year by Warner Bros). Based on a novel by Cornelia Funke and starring Brendan Fraser, Paul Bettany (The Da Vinci Code) and Academy Award winner Helen Mirren, this Narnia-wannabe never really had much of a chance. With tepid reviews (36% Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes) and very low awareness according to pre-release industry tracking, Inkheart only mustered about $7.72M for the weekend, finishing a disappointing #7.

The most-nominated film of the year got a boost as well as The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (Paramount) managed another $1.6M to start the 3-day, which translated to another top ten finish with a $6M weekend take (ninth for the 3-day). With nominations for Best Picture, Best Actor: Brad Pitt, Best Supporting Actress: Taraji P. Henson, Best Director: David Fincher, Best Adapted Screenplay: Eric Roth and Best Original Score: Alexandre Desplat among others, Ben Button has a new domestic gross of $111M.

Three other Oscar nominated films got their post-nomination expansions. Revolutionary Road (Dreamworks/Paramount) was crushed by Thursday’s Oscar announcement, but still managed to do some decent business. Dreamworks was clearly banking on a nomination for Best Actress for Kate Winslet and an outside shot at a Best Picture nom, but the Sam Mendes-directed movie settled for nods for Best Supporting Actor: Michael Shannon, Best Art Direction and Best Costume Design: Albert Wolsky. Rolling out on 1,058 screens, the dark, domestic drama sold a respectable $5.26M in tickets over the 3-day for a $4,979 Per Theatre Average.

Mickey Rourke’s career-resurrecting performance in The Wrestler (Fox Searchlight) grabbed an approximate $6,500 PTA for the weekend. With a more limited 566 playdates, the Darren Aronofsky-directed gem corralled about $3.7M for a new cume of $9.5M. The picture could get another boost if Rourke manages to win the Screen Actors Guild Award for Best Actor.

Finally, Best Picture nominee Frost/Nixon (Universal) has failed to ignite much interest despite 5 Academy Award nominations. Co-starring the aforementioned Michael Sheen, the Ron Howard-directed film has expanded to 1,100 locations, but it managed only a disappointing $3.02M for the weekend for a new cume of just $12M.

FINAL STUDIO ESTIMATES
1. Paul Blart: Mall Cop (Sony) – $21.5M, $$6,838 PTA, $64.8M cume
2. NEW – Underworld: Rise of the Lycans (Sony) – $20.7M, $7,036 PTA, $20.7M cume
3. Gran Torino (Warner Bros) – $16M, $5,255, $97.57M cume
4. Hotel For Dogs (Dreamworks/Paramount) – $12.36M, $3,779 PTA, $36.95M cume
5. Slumdog Millionaire (Fox Searchlight) – $10.55M, $7,477 PTA, $55.91M cume
6. My Bloody Valentine 3-D (Lionsgate) – $10.05M, $3,966 PTA, $37.72M cume
7. NEW – Inkheart (Warner Bros) – $7.72M, $2,910 PTA, $7.72M cume
8. Bride Wars (Fox) – $7M, $2,671 PTA, $48.7M cume
9. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (Paramount) – $6M, $2,651 PTA, $111M cume
10. Notorious (Fox Searchlight) – $5.7M, $3,473 PTA, $31.79M cume
11. Defiance (Paramount Vantage) – $5.43M, $3,030 PTA, $18.32M cume
12. Revolutionary Road (Dreamworks/Paramount) – $5.26M, $4,979 PTA, $11.86M
*The Wrestler (Fox Searchlight) – $3.9M, $6,890 PTA, $9.71M cume
*Frost/Nixon (Universal) – $3.24M, $2,948 PTA, $12.22M cume

Steve Mason is on Facebook and now also on Twitter.

He is a classically-trained stage actor, who has starred in heavyweight UK productions of Romeo and Juliet, Henry V, Amadeus and The Dresser, was somehow overlooked by both Hollywood Foreign Press and Oscar voters when he starred as Tony Blair in 2006’s The Queen. (He was outshined by Helen Mirren, who won every acting prize imaginable). This year, he is in the shadow of Frank Langella’s towering portrayal of President Richard Nixon in Frost/Nixon.

As an aside, The Queen was the second in screenwriter Peter Morgan’s Tony Blair trilogy. The first film was called The Deal for British television and tells the story of the rivalry between Blair and current British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. (This is a great title to put in your Netflix or Blockbuster cue.) The final film will be called The Special Relationship, which will focus on the intimate friendship between the British PM and President Bill Clinton between 1997-2000. Sheen has signed on, but there is no word on who will play Clinton. Morgan says the idea for the third film began to germinate when he heard that Blair and Clinton were alone together when Vice President Al Gore conceded the 2000 election.

In the meantime, Sheen will almost certainly have the #1 movie in America this weekend with Underworld: Rise of the Lycans. This is the third Underworld movie, but it is a prequel set in the dark ages with Sheen as Lucien, a young werewolf, who leads a war against Bill Nighy as Viktor, the leader of the vampire race.

2003’s Underworld, directed by Len Wiseman, opened to $21.75M ($52M cume) and Underworld: Evolution improved to a $26.85M opening in 2006 on its way to $62M domestic. But Rise of the Lycans is an origins story and will reportedly not include the sexy, black leather-clad Selene (Kate Beckinsale), so the 3-day could be a bit softer than the last outing. I am predicting a possible $24.34M.

Sheen and Beckinsale were a longstanding couple prior to shooting the original Underworld, and they have a daughter together, but the actress left him for director Wiseman during what must have been a tumultuous shoot. Wiseman and Beckinsale were married in 2004, and teamed up for Underworld: Evolution, in which Sheen’s Lucien character was only seen in flashbacks. Now, Patrick Tatopoulos has stepped in as director on Underworld 3 sans Beckinsale.

Meanwhile, Frost/Nixon goes wider, but it just hasn’t quite clicked with softer-than-expected Per Theatre Averages over the holidays. The Ron Howard-directed biopic with absolutely immaculate reviews could reach $3.35M with a PTA of $4,200 or so. That could make it the fourteenth-best grossing movie of the 3-day.

A fair number of bloggers questioned my prediction last week that Paul Blart: Mall Cop (Sony) would win the MLK weekend, but the tracking was incredibly solid with Males Under 25, which is a big money demo. With no direct competition, this big dumb comedy should hold up pretty well and could dip a mere 41% for a $17M 3-day, enough for second place.

Two Warner Bros releases will battle for third, but I am giving Clint Eastwood’s Gran Torino a slight edge over its new fantasy film Inkheart. Torino could ride Oscar attention to another $13.5M, but Iain Softley’s new film based on Cornelia Funke’s novel of the same name has met with lukewarm reviews (46% Fresh as of Wednesday night) and doesn’t show much traction with audiences in industry tracking. That could mean a fourth place finish with a possible $13.2M.

I am anticipating that the live action family film Hotel For Dogs (Dreamworks/Paramount) will likely hold well with about $10.5M to round out the top five. Emma Roberts, from Nickelodeon’s Unfabulous and the 2007 film version of Nancy Drew ($25.6M domestic), and Jake T. Austin, presently starring in Disney Channel’s Wizards of Waverly Place, have a decent little hit for their resumes with a possible $35M in the bank after ten days.

Three Oscar nominees will expand this weekend, and they will show nice increases. Fox Searchlight’s Slumdog Millionaire expands from 601 to just over 1,000 playdates, and it may see a 52% increase from last weekend for about $8.9M. Darren Aronofsky’s The Wrestler (Fox Searchlight), featuring Mickey Rourke’s career game-changing performance, adds about 365 screens, and I think it could add $4.5M, which would mean a Per Theatre Average of $10K. Finally, Revolutionary Road (Dreamworks/Paramount) widens to 800 or so locations, and its PTA could be something in the $5,500 range for a possible $4.4M.

FINAL WEEKEND 3-DAY PREDICTIONS FOR JANUARY 23-25
1. NEW – Underworld: Rise of the Lycans (Sony) – $24.34M
2. Paul Blart: Mall Cop (Sony) – $17M
3. Gran Torino (Warner Bros) – $13.5M
4. NEW – Inkheart (Warner Bros) – $13.2M
5. Hotel For Dogs (Paramount) – $10.5M
6. My Bloody Valentine 3D (Lionsgate) – $9.9M
7. Slumdog Millionaire (Fox Searchlight) – $8.9M
8. Notorious (Fox Searchlight) – $8.25M
9. Bride Wars (Fox) – $5.85M
10. Defiance (Paramount Vantage) – $4.75M
11. The Wrestler (Fox Searchlight) – $4.5M
12. Revolutionary Road (Dreamworks/Paramount) – $4.4M
13. The Unborn (Universal) – $3.5M
14. Frost/Nixon (Universal) – $3.35M

Steve Mason is on Facebook and now also on Twitter.