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

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983)
(SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk, and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. That doesn’t mea…

You are, by your own admission, a vagabond.

Doctor Who Season 10 - Worst to Best
Season 10 has the cachet of an anniversary year, one in which two of its stories actively trade on the past and another utilises significant elements. As such, it’s the first indication of the series’ capacity for slavishly indulging the two-edged sword that is nostalgia, rather than simply bringing back ratings winners (the Daleks). It also finds the show at its cosiest, a vibe that had set in during the previous season, which often seemed to be taking things a little too comfortably. Season 10 is rather more cohesive, even as it signals the end of an era (with Jo’s departure). As a collection of stories, you perhaps wouldn’t call it a classic year, but as a whole, an example of the Pertwee UNIT era operating at its most confident, it more than qualifies.

You can’t keep the whole world in the dark about what’s going on. Once they know that a five-mile hunk of rock is going to hit the world at 30,000 miles per hour, the people will want to know what the hell we intend to do about it.

Meteor (1979)
(SPOILERS) In which we find Sean Connery – or his agent, whom he got rid of subsequent to this and Cuba – showing how completely out of touch he was by the late 1970s. Hence hitching his cart to the moribund disaster movie genre just as movie entertainment was being rewritten and stolen from under him. He wasn’t alone, of course – pal Michael Caine would appear in both The Swarm and Beyond the Poseidon Adventure during this period – but Meteor’s lack of commercial appeal was only accentuated by how functional and charmless its star is in it. Some have cited Meteor as the worst movie of his career (Christopher Bray in his book on the actor), but its sin is not one of being outright terrible, rather of being terminally dull.

I mean, I am just a dumb bunny, but, we are good at multiplying.

Zootropolis (2016)
(SPOILERS) The key to Zootropolis’ (or Zootopia as our American cousins refer to it; the European title change being nothing to do with U2, but down to a Danish zoo, it seems, which still doesn’t explain the German title, though) creative success isn’t so much the conceit of its much-vaunted allegory regarding prejudice and equality, or – conversely – the fun to be had riffing on animal stereotypes (simultaneously clever and obvious), or even the appealing central duo voiced by Ginnifier Goodwin (as first rabbit cop Judy Hopps) and Jason Bateman (fox hustler Nick Wilde). It’s coming armed with that rarity for an animation; a well-sustained plot that doesn’t devolve into overblown set pieces or rest on the easy laurels of musical numbers and montages.

So credit’s due to co-directors Byron Howard (Bolt, Tangled) and Rich Moore (of The Simpsons, Futurama, and latterly, the great until it kind of rests on its laurels Wreck-It-Ralph) and Jared Bush (presumably one of the th…

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 …

You keep a horse in the basement?

The ‘Burbs (1989)
(SPOILERS) The ‘Burbs is Joe Dante’s masterpiece. Or at least, his masterpiece that isn’t his bite-the-hand-that-feeds-you masterpiece Gremlins 2: The New Batch, or his high profile masterpiece Gremlins. Unlike those two, the latter of which bolted out of the gate and took audiences by surprise with it’s black wit subverting the expected Spielberg melange, and the first which was roundly shunned by viewers and critics for being absolutely nothing like the first and waving that fact gleefully under their noses, The ‘Burbs took a while to gain its foothold in the Dante pantheon. 

It came out at a time when there had been a good few movies (not least Dante’s) taking a poke at small town Americana, and it was a Tom Hanks movie when Hanks was still a broad strokes comedy guy (Big had just made him big, Turner and Hooch was a few months away; you know you’ve really made it when you co-star with a pooch). It’s true to say that some, as with say The Big Lebowski, “got it” on fi…

He mobilised the English language and sent it into battle.

Darkest Hour (2017)
(SPOILERS) Watching Joe Wright’s return to the rarefied plane of prestige – and heritage to boot – filmmaking following the execrable folly of the panned Pan, I was struck by the difference an engaged director, one who cares about his characters, makes to material. Only last week, Ridley Scott’s serviceable All the Money in the World made for a pointed illustration of strong material in the hands of someone with no such investment, unless they’re androids. Wright’s dedication to a relatable Winston Churchill ensures that, for the first hour-plus, Darkest Hour is a first-rate affair, a piece of myth-making that barely puts a foot wrong. It has that much in common with Wright’s earlier Word War II tale, Atonement. But then, like Atonement, it comes unstuck.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.