Monday Morning Quarterback
By BOP Staff
June 25, 2007
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Kim Hollis: Evan Almighty opened to a disappointing $32.1 million, far short of the $50 million opening it needed to have a shot at making money. Is this anything other than a disaster for Universal Pictures?
David Mumpower: I can't see any cause for positivity here, no. The movie had a lackluster first day, saw no increase from Friday to Saturday, and is probably overestimated as is. It's not Stealth or The Island by any stretch, but it's the biggest disappointment of summer 2007 thus far.
Joel Corcoran: Yes, it's a lesson to every other motion picture studio on the planet.
David Mumpower: What's the lesson, Joel?
Reagen Sulewski: With that ridiculous budget, they really needed a Thanksgiving or Christmas release to catch the family audiences.
Joel Corcoran: Reagen just said it. If you're going to release the most expensive comedy ever made in the entire history of movies, do it around the time that families will flock to see it.
Tim Briody: Pretty much, but I'm wondering what they were expecting when you attempt to turn a biblical story into a broad comedy.
Joel Corcoran: And even worse, Tim, the same type of broad comedy that has been done and re-done before.
Kim Hollis: Considering how much was spent on the film, there's just no way to spin this in an upbeat manner. What a mess.
David Mumpower: Reagen brings up a great point. With a negative cost in excess of $200 million, I have to wonder if Michael Scott was in charge of the accounting on this one.
Reagen Sulewski: That, and don't let Steve Oedekerk near anything that can produce the written word.
David Mumpower: To be fair, he did brilliantly with Bruce Almighty. Between this and The Barnyard, however, it's looking like he should avoid animals like a zoophobic.
Joel Corcoran: I want to return to Monty Python for a brief moment. If you're talking about The Life of Brian or The Meaning of Life, those are classic comedies that rely heavily on social commentary about religion in public life. Evan Almighty simply used a biblical story as a construct for cheap laughs.
Tim Briody: And computer generated animals.
Kim Hollis: No, real animals. It would have been cheap if they were CGI.
David Mumpower: You're not thinking like Michael Scott would, Kim. Why choose a cheaper solution when you can have real *and* CGI animals for only twice the cost!
Reagen Sulewski: The other thing to look at would be the Doctor Dolittle movies - which weren't great cinema by any means. But they still made double their budgets.
David Mumpower: I think that's the crux of the discussion about why this is such a failure, Reagen. Both of those movies combined were roughly $30 million cheaper than Evan Almighty is on its own. Had there been some budgetary discretion, we would be describing this one as a nice, solid opening weekend. A likely $90-$100 million opener that cost twice that, on the other hand, is a bloodbath.
Next Office cast member to fail in movies: John Krasinski
Kim Hollis: Steve Carell seemed to be a rising star due to the surprise success of The 40 Year-Old Virgin and his hit TV show The Office. Why do you think audiences weren't willing to see his latest outing?
Reagen Sulewski: It's something of a miracle, if you'll excuse the pun, that it got this big of an opening. Some jokes would have been a thoughtful inclusion in the commercials. You could tell they were getting really desperate by the end, showing the flood. Ironically, they had no faith in people.
David Mumpower: Again, it's all about perspective. This movie has opened $10 million larger than The 40 Year-Old Virgin did. The difference is that the latter film cost $26 million before marketing while the other one is reportedly right at $200 million. I don't think Carell deserves the blame for the way Evan Almighty has gone off the rails.
Joel Corcoran: I think it's because Steve Carell definitely appeals to fans of "adult humor," while this movie was marketed as a family comedy. Fans who really liked The 40-Year-Old Virgin probably aren't interested in a family comedy, and parents who love Carell's comedy still wouldn't think his comedy is "kid friendly."
Kim Hollis: Yeah, they just went out and made a comedy with one of the funniest guys in the business that turned out to be in no way humorous. I don't necessarily think you can blame Carell for bad material, especially when he probably thought this was a great concept when he signed on.
David Mumpower: Kim brings up a great point. I have been singing the praises of this production for a while now. I thought that capitalizing on Carell's ascension was a masterstroke on the part of Universal. The problem is that they didn't have a good idea for the movie itself, just its existence.
Reagen Sulewski: I touched on it a bit earlier, but that's sort of Oedekerk and Shadyac's thing - to come up with a concept but not really have a handle on the execution. Occasionally they get away with it, but they're two of the biggest hacks in the business, in my opinion.
After The Number 23, Jim Carrey might be regretting his no sequels policy
Kim Hollis: Evan Almighty is the third instance wherein a Jim Carrey sequel not starring Jim Carrey has greatly disappointed. What is it about Carrey that elevates otherwise forgettable premises into box office gold?
Tim Briody: I'm not exactly sure, but the guy deserves a lot of credit for choosing not to do these sequels, especially the Dumb & Dumber and Mask ones, which should have been torpedoed immediately once he passed.
Kim Hollis: I have to say I respect Carrey's No Sequels policy since the days of Ace Ventura.
Reagen Sulewski: Eternal Sunshine 2 could work, though...
David Mumpower: Anyone who has a quantifiable answer to that question is worth a lot of money in the industry. Dumb and Dumber and The Mask both sounded better with him than without; meanwhile, their sequels were clearly disasters. Evan Almighty is not that cut and dried although the results are hard to dispute.
Reagen Sulewski: I'm not sure if it's Jim specifically, but there's a pretty obvious "we're just doing this for the money" vibe from all three of these films.
Kim Hollis: Aren't they always?
Reagen Sulewski: Not so blatantly.
David Mumpower: Reagen does touch on a good point, though. There isn't any real difference between these and those awful straight-to-video Disney animations sequels.
Kim Hollis: Which Disney will no longer do! Okay, maybe it's not all about the money.
David Mumpower: Right now, Universal is asking, "What money?"
Stephen King 1, Eli Roth, 0
Kim Hollis: It was a tough week for Steve Carell, but it was a great weekend for John Cusack and Stephen King. Their movie, 1408, debuted with a stellar $20.2 million, making it one of the most successful openings of Cusack's career. What is the reason for this success?
Reagen Sulewski: People realized there's more to horror than sado-masochism and blood spatter?
Kim Hollis: It's a scary movie that is intelligent and uses suspense and tension to build scares rather than just another slasher/gorno.
Joel Corcoran: A unique premise for a horror story, a recognized name behind it, and a very well done marketing campaign.
David Mumpower: I hate to cast aspersions on this one by grouping it in with what has passed for horror thus far in 2007. This isn't a pointless slasher flick starring marginally famous sexy teens. It's a cerebral thriller straight out of the mold of King's best horror adaptation, The Shining.
Kim Hollis: Usually MGM completely misses the boat when it comes to marketing. I guess they were due for a win.
Reagen Sulewski: I don't know if unique would be exactly the word I would use to describe it - it's almost archetypal horror.
Kim Hollis: It passes for unique these days, though.
David Mumpower: It's unique in that Cusack is on screen by himself as much as you will ever see an actor work alone. It borders on being a one man play for long stretches...although one could effectively argue the CGI-living room is also a character.
Joel Corcoran: And the marketing around this movie did a great job of presenting the basic storyline, but at the same time, piquing interest about what the whole film is about.
David Mumpower: While the reviews do not impact opening weekend box office, I do find it noteworthy that this is the first universally positively reviewed horror movie of the year. I also find it interesting that 1408 smoked the $14.6 million opening of Jim Carrey's The Number 23 and will at least double its final box office.
Reagen Sulewski: I wouldn't be so sure that reviews didn't help. They were unusually uniform and loud in support. I think they made people sit up and take a closer look.
Depressing films make for poorly received summer fare
Kim Hollis: There was one other relatively tame opener this weekend. Angelina Jolie's A Mighty Heart earned only $4 million with a mediocre venue average of $2,956. Even against a budget of only $16 million, this one is probably a loser, right?
Reagen Sulewski: This was a film about a seriously unpleasant event, dressed up as a Hallmark movie. I expected a little bit more, but this isn't too surprising a result.
David Mumpower: Undoubtedly, it's a loser in the short term. This is a project that was risky to take on and the goal would be to earn end-of-year awards attention in order to sustain its life on the ancillary movie revenue markets. The reviews, while solid, probably are not enough to sustain that sort of momentum.
Kim Hollis: It's not like A Mighty Heart offers the feel-good story of the summer. I think this would have been better off released in the fall, especially since I'm sure her performance will be positioned as an awards contender.
Reagen Sulewski: Jolie's probably still in good shape for awards attention. Acting awards aren't so dependent on box office, and there's a bit of value in getting out there as the first big performance of the year.
David Mumpower: Maybe she's putting all her eggs in Beowulf's basket!
Fantastic Four's box office drops precipitously. Ioan Gruffudd and Jessica Alba stare dully.
Kim Hollis: Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer fell a whopping 65% to $20.1 million this weekend. With current box office of $97.6 million, are you ready to call it a disappointment?
Reagen Sulewski: That performance isn't just cratering, it's digging tunnels.
Kim Hollis: It gives me faith in mankind, at least.
David Mumpower: Indeed. I'm started to wonder if this is a franchise killer a la The Hulk. It's hard for me to imagine North American audiences saying, "Yay! Ioan Gruffudd is back!" For that matter, while Jessica Alba is all kinds of smoking hot, it's readily apparent CGI blockbusters are not her thing.
David Mumpower: It's strange to me what a great job they did in casting The Thing and Johnny Torch and how completely they failed with the main two people.
Reagen Sulewski: Wait, Jessica Alba isn't CGI?
Kim Hollis: You can tell she's not because CGI Jessica Alba would have given a better performance.
Joel Corcoran: And she would've had better hair, too, Kim.