Skip to main content

I kinda thought we would just wing it, you know.


Box Office Comment
January-February 2013


It’s the last week of February and, unsurprisingly, few contenders for box office glory have been released so far. Only two films (Die Hard 5 and Safe Haven) featured in my 2013 predictions and I usefully managed to omit Identity Thief, which is close to $100m in the US.

But who can predict hits, let alone comedy hits? Released at another moment, a Jason Bateman comedy would be a bomb. True, Seth Gordon topped $100m with both his previous features (Horrible Bosses and Four Christmases), and a savaging by critics is no impediment to a responsive mass audience. But no one was really expecting it to hit this big; the trailers, in particular, were horrible.

So, logic suggests this is the Melissa McCarthy factor; her first starring role after stealing Bridesmaids, and audiences clearly want to see her being obnoxiously crude and bovine. It bodes well for the prospects of the upcoming pairing of McCarthy with Sandy Buttocks in The Heat; my top-end estimate of US $120m now looks quite low. That said, give it 18 months and audiences will likely have tired of her.

The most notable run of disappointments in the year to date have been with action movies. Arnie’s return stiffed (The Last Stand) despite some favourable comments regarding Jee-woon Kim’s direction, and thus far it hasn’t been making up numbers in the rest of the world. But neither this, nor Stallone’s solo, non-franchise Bullet to the Head ever seemed to have much prospect of reward.

Schwarzenegger has been on hiatus governating for a decade and was a dimming bulb even before his descent into politics. Stallone has shrewdly spent the past decade reviving franchises and creating one that doesn’t rely solely on him (The Expendables). When it came to him doing his thing solo, no one wanted to know. Just like ’94-2004, then. Maybe The Tomb will do better as they team up. While I didn’t expect either of these to be hits, I didn’t expect quite such failures.

It hasn’t been good news for younger “icons” either. Mark Wahlberg may be a patchy leading man, but he’s a very Midas-like producer. The failure of Broken City is his first significant misstep since 2008’s Max Payne (the director of which will be mentioned shortly). Wahlberg tends to wisely make medium-budget starring vehicles, and had a very good year last year (Ted and Contraband), although he’s an actor whose following is mainly US-based. If teaming with Russell Crowe didn’t work out this time, there’s always Denzel coming up (2 Guns).

With the likes of Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham it’s very much about lowered expectations anyway. As long as these guys make action pictures on a certain budget they can guarantee a certain level of return. Statham’s profile has been elevated by his support in The Expendables, following the profitable Transporter trilogy. But can anyone recall The Mechanic, Killer Elite or Safe (the middle one of which was more costly than he is used to, and suffered accordingly)? So now we have a new iteration of Parker, which looks to yield similar returns to the last few efforts. He’ll continue to get work, but the rare perfect fit of personality and interesting material (The Bank Job) now seems like an aberration.

Johnson has also prospered within (other people’s) franchises (Fast Five, Journey 2) but floundered on his own. Snitch looks set to follow the underwhelming Faster with Stat levels of box office. He has Fast 6 and G.I Joe 2 coming up, so they will insulate him for a while. But, like Statham, no one is really expecting his star vehicles to become break-out hits.

This glut of testosterone has also seen the one expected juggernaut crash and burn. Albeit, how much it was expected by Fox is questionable given the lack of advance screenings. A Good Day to Die Hard was roundly molested by critics and trampled into the dirt by fans of the franchise.

Reportedly, it had good responses from the general audience on its first weekend (B+) but its second week plummet suggests otherwise. If Live Free and Die Hard met with resistance from the fans who said it betrayed the franchise, there’s no denying that it was a word-of-mouth hit that came as something of a surprise. In contrast, Die Hard 5 will end up nearly $100m lower than its nearest franchise competitor when adjusted for inflation.

It’s another example of Fox having no idea how to make movies diligently. Slap a hack (John Moore, an in-house director who made all five of his films with the studio; what hold do they have over him, and why do they want him given the middling returns his pictures have yielded?) on a picture and quality be damned. And presumably Bruce Willis approved him (although Willis has always had negligible quality control, both in scripts and directors).

I don’t want actually this to bomb, because I’d like to see a worthy Die Hard 6 conclude the “double” trilogy. With John McTiernan returning.  Worldwide, the film is nearing $200m, and could well reach about $275m before it pegs out. As it cost $90m a sixth installment is possible, but I’m sure no one wants the stink of another one like this on them. I predicted $350m worldwide low-end if it didn’t stink. Alas, it did.

A Nicholas Sparks adaptation seems like a sure thing; reasonably cheap and an assured return. That’s why even a bidding war on his novels is a no-brainer. About two-thirds of the gross for these romantic melodramas comes from the US, however, so the $50m Safe Haven has made so far will likely finish up around, or just over, $100m worldwide.

A few of the films released so far have achieved surprising yields. Mama was an expected PG-13 horror hit, with Guillermo Del Toro attached as producer and nestled in the traditional January horror window. It had better legs than the one-week Texas Chainsaw 3D prequel and will end up about $100m worldwide. Another horror-tinged hit is Warm Bodies, a romantic zombie movie that has found an audience I wasn’t expecting (it helps that the reviews have been kind, of course). In contrast, Beautiful Creatures, a botched Young Adult adaptation, bombed and can be added to the ever-increasing pile of Twilight/Hunger Games-wannabe failures. The other horror-ish release has been Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters. Delayed and labelled a piece of shit, the medium-budgeted horror comedy has proved a success worldwide, certainly more so than anyone consigning it to the early January rubbish heap expected ($163m an counting).

The other hit that deserves a mention completely failed to make an impression in the States, although it nabbed Naomi Watts a Best Actress nod. The Impossible made a negligible $18m at the US box office, but its worldwide take stands at $161m. There’s little doubt that the film wasn’t cheap, and critical reaction has been lukewarm, but it’s interesting to see a release where the US response is so divergent – nine times lower (Resident Evil might be a similar comparison where the overall take is about six times the US one).

Escape from Planet Earth is the Weinsteins just about justifying their animation investment (see also Hoodwinked!) but not really having the understanding of the genre. Still, no one expected great things and it’s doing reasonable business.

The other area to note is the performance of Oscar nominees. As usual, films have received a bump from all the attention; Silver Linings Playbook in particular. Argo too, had pretty much finished its run when it got a second wind of another $30m+ from all the awards attention. The worldwide versus US grosses are something worth considering this year, as there are significant disparities in both directions.

Unsurprisingly, Lincoln has made three-quarters of its money in the US. At best, that will end up as two-thirds. In the current landscape, US takings would be expected/hoped as a third-ish of a film’s overall box office at maximum (in terms of the increasing appetite for cinema outside of America). Zero Dark Thirty has seen even less interest outside of America, with only just over a tenth of its gross (the reverse of The Impossible, which might highlight the US-centric subject matter and viewpoint, except that The Impossible went out of its way to give us white Caucasian leads). Now awards season has finished, that’s unlikely to change.

So too, Silver Linings Playbook ($107m, $160m overall) and Argo ($130m, £207m overall) look to finish up with two-thirds US and a third rest-of-the-world.

Django Unchained ($158m, $380m overall) and Les Miserables ($146m, $395m overall) are both heading in the direction of the third US/two-thirds rest-of-the-world ratio, but there’s some distance to go yet.

But the only film (and most of the nominees this year are significant hits on some level, so everyone will be happy) to truly hit the new model is Life of Pi. $113m in the US but $583m worldwide. That’s only a fifth of its take coming from America.

Beasts of the Southern Wild and Amour are both very much art house inclined, and successes on that basis (which will likely be increased from the attention they get as rentals).

March sees would-be hits make themselves known, including the delayed Jack the Giant Slayer, Oz the Great and Powerful, The Incredible Burt Wonderstone, Olympus has Fallen, Admission (Fey and Rudd), The Croods, G.I. Joe Retaliation, The Host and (for US audiences) Tyler Perry’s Temptation. A couple of films could break out bigger than their budgets would normally allow, notably Wayne Blair’s feel-good ‘Nam girl group film The Sapphires. There’s also Derek Cianfrance’s The Place Beyond the Pines, but that’s more likely to garner critical kudos alone. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

You kind of look like a slutty Ebola virus.

Crazy Rich Asians (2018)
(SPOILERS) The phenomenal success of Crazy Rich Asians – in the US at any rate, thus far – might lead one to think it's some kind of startling original, but the truth is, whatever its core demographic appeal, this adaptation of Kevin Kwan's novel taps into universally accepted romantic comedy DNA and readily recognisable tropes of family and class, regardless of cultural background. It emerges a smoothly professional product, ticking the expected boxes in those areas – the heroine's highs, lows, rejections, proposals, accompanied by whacky scene-stealing best friend – even if the writing is sometimes a little on the clunky side.

They make themselves now.

Screamers (1995)
(SPOILERS) Adapting Philip K Dick isn’t as easy as it may seem, but that doesn't stop eager screenwriters from attempting to hit that elusive jackpot. The recent Electric Dreams managed to exorcise most of the existential gymnastics and doubts that shine through in the best versions of his work, leaving material that felt sadly facile. Dan O'Bannon had adapted Second Variety more than a decade before it appeared as Screamers, a period during which he and Ronald Shusett also turned We Can Remember It For You Wholesale into Total Recall. So the problem with Screamers isn't really the (rewritten) screenplay, which is more faithful than most to its source material (setting aside). The problem with Screamers is largely that it's cheap as chips.

Well, we took a vote. Predator’s cooler, right?

The Predator (2018)
(SPOILERS) Is The Predator everything you’d want from a Shane Black movie featuring a Predator (or Yautja, or Hish-Qu-Ten, apparently)? Emphatically not. We've already had a Shane Black movie featuring a Predator – or the other way around, at least – and that was on another level. The problem – aside from the enforced reshoots, and the not-altogether-there casting, and the possibility that full-on action extravaganzas, while delivered competently, may not be his best foot forward – is that I don't think Black's really a science-fiction guy, game as he clearly was to take on the permanently beleaguered franchise. He makes The Predator very funny, quite goofy, very gory, often entertaining, but ultimately lacking a coherent sense of what it is, something you couldn't say of his three prior directorial efforts.

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …

Right! Let’s restore some bloody logic!

It Couldn't Happen Here (1987)
(SPOILERS) "I think our film is arguably better than Spiceworld" said Neil Tennant of his and Chris Lowe's much-maligned It Couldn't Happen Here, a quasi-musical, quasi-surrealist journey through the English landscape via the Pet shop Boys' "own" history as envisaged by co-writer-director Jack Bond. Of course, Spiceworld could boast the presence of the illustrious Richard E Grant, while It Couldn't Happen Here had to settle for Gareth Hunt. Is its reputation deserved? It's arguably not very successful at being a coherent film (even thematically), but I have to admit that I rather like it, ramshackle and studiously aloof though it is.

My pectorals may leave much to be desired, Mrs Peel, but I’m the most powerful man you’ve ever run into.

The Avengers 2.23: The Positive-Negative Man
If there was a lesson to be learned from Season Five, it was not to include "man" in your title, unless it involves his treasure. The See-Through Man may be the season's stinker, but The Positive-Negative Man isn't far behind, a bog-standard "guy with a magical science device uses it to kill" plot. A bit like The Cybernauts, but with Michael Latimer painted green and a conspicuous absence of a cool hat.

The possibilities are gigantic. In a very small way, of course.

The Avengers 5.24: Mission… Highly Improbable
With a title riffing on a then-riding-high US spy show, just as the previous season's The Girl from Auntie riffed on a then-riding-high US spy show, it's to their credit that neither have even the remotest connection to their "inspirations" besides the cheap gags (in this case, the episode was based on a teleplay submitted back in 1964). Mission… Highly Improbable follows in the increasing tradition (certainly with the advent of Season Five and colour) of SF plotlines, but is also, in its particular problem with shrinkage, informed by other recent adventurers into that area.

What a truly revolting sight.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar’s Revenge (aka Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales) (2017)
(SPOILERS) The biggest mistake the Pirates of the Caribbean sequels have made is embracing continuity. It ought to have been just Jack Sparrow with an entirely new cast of characters each time (well, maybe keep Kevin McNally). Even On Stranger Tides had Geoffrey Rush obligatorily returning as Barbossa. Although, that picture’s biggest problem was its director; Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar’s Revenge has a pair of solid helmers in Joachim Rønning and Espen Sandberg, which is a relief at least. But alas, the continuity is back with a vengeance. And then some. Why, there’s even an origin-of-Jack Sparrow vignette, to supply us with prerequisite, unwanted and distracting uncanny valley (or uncanny Johnny) de-aging. The movie as a whole is an agreeable time passer, by no means the dodo its critical keelhauling would suggest, albeit it isn’t even pretending to try hard to come up with …

Bring home the mother lode, Barry.

Beyond the Black Rainbow (2010)

If Panos Cosmatos’ debut had continued with the slow-paced, tripped-out psychedelia of the first hour or so I would probably have been fully on board with it, but the decision to devolve into an ‘80s slasher flick in the final act lost me.

The director is the son of George Pan Cosmatos (he of The Cassandra Crossing and Cobra, and in name alone of Tombstone, apparently) and it appears that his inspiration was what happened to the baby boomers in the ‘80s, his parents’ generation. That element translates effectively, expressed through the extreme of having a science institute engaging in Crowley/Jack Parsons/Leary occult quests for enlightenment in the ‘60s and the survivors having become burnt out refugees or psychotics by the ‘80s. Depending upon your sensibilities, the torturously slow pace and the synth soundtrack are positives, while the cinematography managed to evoke both lurid early ‘80s cinema and ‘60s experimental fare. 

Ultimately the film takes a …