Monday Morning Quarterback
By BOP Staff
August 6, 2007
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Kim Hollis: This weekend, The Bourne Ultimatum became the largest August opener of all-time, earning $70.2 million from 3,660 venues. To what do you attribute this record-shattering performance?
Joel Corcoran: I attribute its performance to the simple fact that the Bourne franchise is -- by far -- the best spy/action/thriller franchise out there currently. The previous two movies were very well done, with great action, fine acting, and taut storylines. Fans of the first two simply knew that this third installment would be just as good. I also think a lot of people finally wrapped their brains around the idea that maybe "Matt Damon, action star" wasn't an oxymoron.
Shane Jenkins: The Bourne franchise has a reputation for being "adult" without scaring off younger viewers. Older viewers have been patiently waiting for something to see this summer that doesn't involve a guy made of rocks or some kid and his robots. They are the audience most likely to be influenced by reviews, which for Bourne, are by and large rapturous.
David Mumpower: Joel has touched upon the key aspect. We have been discussing this for a while now in our BOP analysis. Movie franchises have a tendency to "pay it forward". The prior film's quality directly impacts consumer desire to for the successor. The Bourne Identity's debut was fine, but it was far from extraordinary. Once it was discovered on DVD (becoming the most popular DVD release of that year), consumers were psyched for The Bourne Supremacy. Seeing that the sequel was a rare example of duplicating if not exceeding the quality of the original, audiences were that much more confident in Ultimatum. When the early reviews confirmed this quality, it was a slam dunk to attend.
Kim Hollis: I don't really think you can discount reviews in this case, either. Generally, I would definitely fall into the camp that says they really don't matter much on opening weekend, but when they're as jubilant as the ones for The Bourne Ultimatum were, I do think there's some effect. People who might have been inclined to either wait a week or two or put the movie off until DVD actually have some motivation to get out to the theaters.
If Matt Damon isn't available for the role, maybe Ben Affleck would be interested
Kim Hollis: The Bourne Ultimatum's opening weekend is equal to the combined opening weekends of the two prior films in the series. Do you believe the franchise has maxed out, or would a fourth film be even more successful?
Joel Corcoran: I think the franchise is maxed out in terms of the storyline -- I have trouble seeing where and how a fourth movie would picked up from the end of the third -- but Universal is going to be sorely tempted to come up with a fourth installment. I'm sure the studio could put together a movie adaptation of one (or both) of Eric Van Lustbader's novels that continued Robert Ludlum's original trilogy, but I think doing so would be a mistake.
David Mumpower: I have seen and greatly enjoyed The Bourne Ultimatum. I don't want this discussion to involve spoilers, so I will speak in generality here. I fully believe if such a scenario were possible wherein Matt Damon and Paul Greengrass receive another high quality screenplay from Tony Gilroy, they would do it. And using the theory I used in the prior discussion about movies paying it forward, The Bourne Whatever would have a solid chance at a $100 million opening. Consistent movie quality such as we have seen with the Bourne series is the gold standard for franchises. It's been better in that regard that Indiana freakin' Jones, and I say that as a huge Indy fanboy.
Reagen Sulewski: I think this was a pretty satisfying "end" to the series if they leave it here, and dramatically I'm not sure there's a need for a fourth film. That said, I'd be right there opening night for that film.
Jim Van Nest: I haven't seen Ultimatum yet, but the trailers show enough for me to know that apparently Bourne gets his memory back and finally ends everything. If that's the case, I'm not in favor of a fourth. Sometimes (and I'm looking at you, George Lucas) the story's told. Sometimes, no matter how much money is out there, the story is simply finished. For me, having the underlying "what the hell did they do to this guy and what will he do when he remembers everything" was what drives this franchise. If this stuff is concluded (as the trailer indicates), I think a fourth movie would lose quite a bit of what made the trilogy so damn good.
Dan Krovich: It's nice to see a franchise actually grow into such a huge success. The numbers are definitely going to have Universal wanting more Bourne, but I would actually love to see it remain as an excellent, tight trilogy and have them not make any more. My suggestion is to give Greengrass a greenlight to make whatever he wants at a small budget in return for him coming on board to direct some brand new spy franchise "from the makers of The Bourne Ultimatum" starring some young up and coming star like Chris Evans or Channing Tatum.
Dan Krovich: With a little further checking, it does seem like Universal already has plans to get Damon and Greengrass back together with Imperial Life in the Emerald City.
Kim Hollis: I would also like to see it end on this note. I mentioned previously that maybe we could look at a re-imagining many years down the line, but the final film really is just pitch perfect. As to whether the story is left open for further installments, I would say that it is, though I'm not certain that such exploration would ultimately be satisfying.
David Mumpower: Even if the money didn't predestine the eventual sequels, there are still quite a few loose ends remaining in the series. I won't say more due to a concern for spoilers, but this story is far from finished as written.
It's probably the giant, floating, dinosaur balloon
Kim Hollis: Eight of the 30 largest openings of all-time have come in the last three months. What is the explanation for this?
Tim Briody: The summer of the three-quel accounts for most of them, the fifth Harry Potter entry and some of the most anticipated non-sequels in years have all come during this time period. I'd almost be more surprised if this wasn't the case.
David Mumpower: I'm going to disagree with Tim to an extent here. 300, The Simpsons Movie and The Bourne Ultimatum are not movies people expected to open to $70 million. Four of the titles (Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, Spider-Man 3, Shrek the Third and Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix) were expected to do this. Transformers was not a shock by any stretch. Those other three are titles that faced long odds to attain that type of debut. The reasons for it are basically six years worth of box office trending since $70 million became the big debut total back in 2001. We've got ticket price inflation as well larger cineplexes capable of herding in more consumers, and venue counts in excess of 4,000 are no longer shocking. It's the entirety of box office behavior encapsulated in these eight performances.
Kim Hollis: I also think there's a lot to be said for having a number of quality films released during the summer time frame. People just don't want to go out to see crap anymore (see: Hot Rod). They need a driving reason to pull them into theaters and I think that is being reflected in the big numbers our blockbusters are seeing this year.
Sorry, Harry.
Kim Hollis: We have had four openers in 2007 that fell in the range of $70 to $79 million - The Bourne Ultimatum, Transformers, The Simpsons Movie and Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. Rank them in terms of how impressed you are by their opening weekends and give an explanation why.
Joel Corcoran: I'd put Transformers first in terms of most impressive, then The Bourne Ultimatum followed very closely by The Simpsons Movie and, finally, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. Nothing really surprised me about Harry Potter's opening weekend, and it's the least impressive of the bunch compared to past performances of films in the franchise. The box office take was a bit lower than I expected, but I think the lower return compared to Prisoner of Azkaban's opening in June 2004 ($93.7 million) can be attributed to a bit of mid-summer malaise and some weariness among fans. The Simpsons Move and The Bourne Ultimatum had equally impressive opening weekends, but for different reasons. I didn't think the Simpsons style and pacing of humor would translate to the big screen, and I was proven wrong. And the fact that The Bourne Ultimatum pulled in as much revenue on its opening weekend as the previous two movies combined is equally astounding. But overall, I have to give the edge to the Transformers. The only thing this movie had going for it was a sense of nostalgia from boys who hit middle school in the mid-80s to mid-90s, and there were a lot of factors cutting against it: a relatively unknown cast, an opening in the middle of films from proven franchises, and a director who's last film (The Island) arguably was the biggest bomb at the box office since Ishtar. The fact that Transformers will end up with one of the top-10 opening weekends of 2007 is just astounding.
David Mumpower: I strongly suspect we will universally agree upon Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix being the least impressive due to the fact that it's a smallish opening for the series. This is skewed by the mid-week opening of $44.2 million prior to the weekend, but in terms of openers, it's expected performance if not disappointing. Transformers is third most impressive in that everyone expected it to be a juggernaut ever since the trailer came out. The only question would be how high. This leaves the choice of most impressive as a race between The Simpsons Movie and The Bourne Ultimatum. Given the fact that the latter franchise had already hit the $52 million range, I don't see it quite as impressive as The Simpsons Movie. Of course, we we flip the discussion to final box office, The Simpsons Movie flips to the bottom, Order of the Phoenix is in the middle, Transformers is most impressive and Bourne Ultimatum is To Be Determined.
Reagen Sulewski: I think I'm a little more impressed by Bourne's opening, seeing as how it's nearly triple what The Bourne Identity opened to. The Simpsons are a cultural icon where Bourne is not, at least yet. It was surprising at the power that The Simpsons still had after 18 years (or maybe because of it), but for Bourne to increase each outing is something special. Transformers is the third most impressive as the most traditional action-film of the bunch, with Potter "just" doing what we expected it to do.
Shane Jenkins: I'm with David on this one. I think The Simpsons was more of a wildcard than these others, given the lackluster quality of the show in recent years. That Fox was able to create a must-see event out of a long-running show that is still on the air (and showing for free) is some kind of impressive.
Many people feel like this Bourne will be the last, or at least the last with Damon, and that created an urgency to see it this weekend. The numbers are terrific, but not quite as unexpected, given that it's the third chapter in an extremely popular and well-reviewed series.
If you hadn't seen any footage for Transformers, you would probably not have anticipated a movie based on a toy would turn into such a box office sensation. But one look at those trailers and all bets were off (even if the movie itself didn't live up to them).
Harry Potter's a little like Lisa Simpson and her consistently excellent report cards. "$77 million? Oh, that's great honey." *pat pat* I'm not saying that it's fair; it's just not very surprising.
Kim Hollis: I'm going to go with Bourne at the top, because while I expected it to increase some over its predecessor, I thought it was pretty close to reaching most of the fans it was going to find, particularly as it's so adult. Next would be The Simpsons Movie, because I actually thought it would open that well, but there were certainly some questions when the tracking came out. Transformers was also no big surprise to me. The trailers killed and people were easily up for an original special effects extravaganza. And poor Harry does finish last, simply because this was exactly in line with what should be expected from the franchise.
Let's go to the movies!
Kim Hollis: Can you ever remember a more exciting time for box office analysis or movie fandom?
David Mumpower: When BOP debuted in the summer of 2001, the box office promptly exploded. The Mummy Returns, Rush Hour 2, Planet of the Apes and Monsters, Inc. all had openings between $60 and $69 million, making them four of the five biggest openings of all-time behind only The Lost World. Then, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone broke the dinosaur epic's four and a half year old record to become the biggest box office opener of all time...by $18 million. That's the last time we saw one of these box office spikes where the entire marketplace for blockbusters was impacted. 2007 has seen a rare combination of that sort of one-time significant growth in the overall box office landscape combined with a once-a-generation level of blockbuster quality.
Reagen Sulewski: Let's hear it for trilogies! The interesting thing about this summer is that nothing is really disappointing relative to expectations, and even the films that opened a little lower than their pedigrees would have to believe are showing excellent legs (Ratatouille, Die Hard).
Kim Hollis: I absolutely think that this is a thrilling time to be a movie fan. I'll be honest. I had reached a point where it was really taking something special for me to consider going to the movie theater. The past few weeks, I've been excited to see a number of new releases. I'm happy to feel that way again about movies.
Looks like this is the end!
Kim Hollis: Underdog opened to an estimated $12 million from 3,013 venues. What should Disney think of this result?
Shane Jenkins: After watching the trailer again, I decided that I would probably bug my parents to see this if I were ten. I don't think $12 million is too bad for a star-less movie, based on a property I doubt today's children are even familiar with.
David Mumpower: "Why did we even bother?"
You know how you at some point in your life made out with (or did even more with) someone and you totally regret it now so you can't make eye contact with them ever again? That's how I feel about Jason Lee because of Underdog.
Reagen Sulewski: I'm not sure how much of this I put towards Disney's vaunted ability to market just about anything, and how much to put towards the idea that kids just like movies with animals that talk in them. Of course, that just makes me think about Babe 2 flopping and I get a little depressed.
Jim Van Nest: Considering Underdog threw under Garfield by almost $10 million, I don't see how they can consider this anything but a disappointment. And it didn't suffer from a lack of advertising. I have to go back to Spidey 3 for a movie I remember seeing so many commercials for (of course, my kids watch a lot of cartoons, so that probably has something to do with it.) That being said, my kids would rather see The Simpsons than Underdog. This was just a bad idea from the get-go and it never got better. As for Jason Lee...at least he can use Alvin and the Chipmunks to redeem himself.
David Mumpower: Jason Lee redeeming himself with Alvin and the Chipmunks? How...optimistic.
Jim Van Nest: Yeah, whoever is picking his scripts, should be looking for work. And if he's doing it, then there needs to be an intervention.
Dan Krovich: I don't think they can be too disappointed based on the box office competition. They'll have the DVD out in time for Christmas, and that's what they're really looking for. If it does well there, they have another straight to DVD franchise they can mine.
Kim Hollis: I have to imagine Disney is okay with this result, given that the movie's release is basically a big commercial for the eventual DVD anyway. As for Jason Lee, how do we know he didn't just do the movie for Pilot Inspektor?
The only reason Rod is Hot is because it is 90+ degrees across the country
Kim Hollis: Hot Rod earned $5 million from 2,607 venues. Why is it such a bomb?
Joel Corcoran: I can think of a few reasons: (1) Andy Samberg is the poor man's Will Ferrell; (2) Akiva Schaffer's directing experience is limited almost entirely to digital shorts on Saturday Night Live; and (3) it looks like the pitch for this movie was "Talladega Nights meets The Benchwarmers."
Tim Briody: They put the funniest thing in the movie in the commercials. The falling off the ramp bit kills, the rest looked horrible and I'm ashamed for everyone involved.
David Mumpower: Why is it such a bomb? They aired footage of it. They should have done this like Cloverfield and made the entire movie's premise a giant mystery.
Reagen Sulewski: "What's an Andy Samberg?"
Jim Van Nest: Should I be embarrassed that I have no idea what Hot Rod is? I mean...I kinda work at a movie site and all.
David Mumpower: It's not a biopic of Roddy Piper, so we're already all disappointed about its content.
Kim Hollis: Movie audiences can smell bombs. It's that simple.
Maybe if they'd shown more Ian McShane in the commercials...
Les Winan: Can you say cocksucker on TV?
Wanna go see a movie about dolls that dress like streetwalkers?
Kim Hollis: Bratz earned $4.3 million from 1,509 venues. Want to kick Lionsgate further while they're down?
Joel Corcoran: Even if I could think of something that could make people at Lionsgate feel worse about this movie than they already do, I'd hate to kick someone when he's down. I do have one question though: What in the hell was Jon Voight thinking when he agreed to appear in this movie? Did Lionsgate get him to sign the contract when he was hospitalized or something?
David Mumpower: Voight fathered the original inspiration for Bratz dolls in Angelina Jolie, so there is an agreeable symmetry to his presence in the movie.
Reagen Sulewski: The premise for the movie just didn't make any sense. Why make a high school movie based on toys that nine-year-old girls play with? There's no frame of reference there. Not to mention that if you've seen the trailer, you've seen the entire film right through to its denouement.
Shane Jenkins: I bet the Lionsgate offices have huge digital clocks counting the days down to the next Saw installment every year.
Dan Krovich: Eh, I wouldn't be surprised if it's already nearly met its production budget, and it's possible Lionsgate paid nothing for the distribution rights. It will sell some more DVDs, CDs, and dolls. I'm sure they were hoping for it to break out more like a Pokemon, but I also doubt anyone is hurting over this.
Kim Hollis: I'm not sure who ever thought this was more than a Disney Channel movie or something appropriate for ABC Family. The problem with this film is that while girls might want to see it, their parents assuredly will not want to tag along.