Monday Morning Quarterback
By BOP Staff
April 13, 2009
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Kim Hollis: Hannah Montana: The Movie opened to $32.3 million, the second best Easter weekend performance ever. Is this more, less, or about what you were expecting from the popular Disney channel comedy?
Josh Spiegel: Not sure if I'll be in the minority here, but I'm saying less. When you consider that the last Hannah Montana movie came out with $31 million during its first weekend (and could have done more had it been in over 1,000 theaters), having this one barely top that is surprising. Obviously, the character and Miley Cyrus herself are still very popular with the right crowd, but I wonder if having a major competitor in the family film genre, Monsters vs. Aliens, took a bit of the edge off this film's opening success. That aside, the fact that the film made less than twice its opening-day gross over the whole weekend shows how much of a one-weekend wonder the movie will be, the Easter holiday notwithstanding.
Brandon Scott: It was becoming tougher to gauge what this would do since the Jonas Brothers Concert Movie disappointed. I would probably side with Josh, though, that it is less than expected, especially since F&F tore up the box office last weekend. This isn't a huge shock, more of a mild rumble. Still a very solid result, though.
Joel Corcoran: It's far less than what I expected. The best Easter weekend performance to date has been Scary Movie 4 at $40.2 million (and, no, I don't know why either), which it earned in 2006. That's equivalent to $42.3 million adjusting for inflation, and at a time when box office receipts for the year are up compared to past years, I'm surprised that Hannah Montana fell that far short of the #1 position. Also, if we continue using inflation-adjusted dollars, Hannah Montana would be in fifth place, not second. Panic Room (#3 in absolute dollars) opened to $30.1 million in 2002, which is equivalent to $35.4 million in today's dollars, and The Matrix (#4 in absolute dollars) opened to $27.8 million ten years ago, which is also (oddly) equivalent to $35.4 million today. Given the immense popularity that Hannah Montana enjoys, I'm kind of stunned that it couldn't do better than any of these other films on the same opening weekend.
Tim Briody: See, it's pretty obvious now that the Jonas Brothers were just a product of the hype machine. Their movie bombing completely exposed them and they were a poor comparison for Hannah Montana, which is the real deal. It was completely kneecapped in the internal multiplier department by Easter weekend (we've finally seen a sub-2.0 multiplier!), but that might actually help it to not completely fall off a cliff next weekend.
Sean Collier: There were so many variables in play here, any prediction would've been tough. The performance of the Best of Both Worlds movie would've inflated expecations, but then again, that film had 3-D inflated totals. The Jonas Brothers flop was a bad sign, but Miley is a bigger star by far. The Easter weekend would seem like a handicap for a kid's film, but that does also free kids and parents up for Friday afternoon viewings on the long weekend - which would've been matinee pricing, further complicating things. I'd say this one performed well and leave it at that.
Reagen Sulewski: I think comparing this to the grab bag of films that have done well on Easter in past years is kind of a red herring. These films are slightly gimmicky films and are made to capitalize on trends while the iron is hot. That this particular group appears to be on the way down is only a sign that its core audience is aging (and when your young star sounds like she's been drinking whiskey for 20 years and smoking Pall Malls by the truckload, that's not a great sign either). So I take the tack that Disney should be congratulated for getting out of these products what they can while they could.
Kim Hollis: I'm with Reagen. I was thinking this would be a low $20 million opener, and it surpassed those expectations (and all tracking) by a significant amount. While I don't know how much impact the Jonas brothers had, I do think that Miley had dipped as far as popularity levels. Kids just outgrow these fads, and a year is a long time in that world.
Ashley Tisdale is putting a voodoo curse on us for not discussing her.
Kim Hollis: Do you expect Miley Cyrus and Zac Efron to do better over the next few years at the box office than the most recent Disney graduate, Hilary Duff did?
Josh Spiegel: I think that for Miley Cyrus, it's too early to tell. She's got the bigger chance of becoming the next Hilary Duff, thanks to the fact that she's associated with only one character. Zac Efron, while not exactly a versatile actor, has branched out...a bit. I'm curious to see how well 17 Again does, but he's got more to gain than Cyrus does. Until she plays someone not named Montana, it's too early to tell and, potentially, not a good sign for her future career.
Brandon Scott: Ultimately, they really can't do worse. Duff flamed out, I believe, since I can't think of anything that SHE anchored to any amount of success (not that this is surprising). I think they both stand a good chance to do better, but I don't think either breaks into a major star category based on the early results. I don't think 17 Again does well, so Cyrus really is the bigger wild-card. It's so easy for a child star (if that's what we want to label them) to get typecast into a role that defined them as a youth, and therefore, never really do much outside of that realm. I dont think Hudgens breaks into major stardom, either...the odds are just not in their favor, it seems. They could only hope to be as respected as, say, a Ryan Gosling has become.
Sean Collier: It's simple - whoever redefines their career first wins. If Efron does some low-buget indie thing once he's released from Disney's chains, he'll be fine. If Miley turns up in barely-more-than-direct-to-DVD romcoms ten years from now, she's done. The name of the game is "Diversify."
Max Braden: Diversifying could equate to diluting the brand. If an actor primarily associated with G-rated material starts doing adult fare they could find themselves out of sight and out of mind of their core audience while struggling to gain the respect of new audiences. I think if either of them succeeds at branching out, it's going to be Miley Cyrus because she's secured more direct name recognition. It wouldn't surprise me to hear comments like "Zac who?" in a few years. He just doesn't strike me as having an identifiable personality.
Reagen Sulewski: I think the key for both of them is to not return calls from Dina Lohan.
Mall cop movies are so three months ago.
Kim Hollis: Observe and Report opened to $11 million. Why do you think this Seth Rogen film failed to captivate mall cop fans throughout North America?
Josh Spiegel: Well, plenty of those mall cop fans were probably hoping for a family-friendly picture, and Observe and Report is the absolute opposite. The mixed reviews, the emphasis on the film being fairly adult (when your main preview starts out with a streaker running through a parking lot, it's probably pretty clear to most parents that it's not a movie for kids), and the recent news stories about the date rape scene may have soured those who were interested in the film's prospects. Still, with the reported $18 million budget, I can't imagine that this film is a flop; at most, it's a moderate success when you consider that it'll make somewhere around $30-40 million.
Brandon Scott: I am going with a mixture of the so-called "Rogen fatigue" that has been bandied about throughout recent films and an unoriginal conept (Paul Blart) failing to incite the masses. I have been banging this drum over the last year. Rogen as lead actor/film anchor does not work. Rogen as supporting actor, much different. This also shows Anna Faris isn't where many thought/hoped she would be after last year's House Bunny success. For some, the stars really need to align to break out on their own, and I don't think it is in the cards for either one of them...on their own.
Joel Corcoran: I agree with the "Rogen fatigue" factor, but I don't think the problem is that Seth Rogen is incapable of playing a lead role. I think the problem is that he ends up in roles that would be great in a supporting cast, but that can't carry a lead. Some misfit, struggling guy working as a mall security guard and living at home with is lush of a mother is great background material for a broader film, but it's not something to base an entire movie around. That, coupled with Paul Blart emerging first on the field of mall cop movies, spelled doom for Observe and Report.
Sean Collier: Paul Blart continues to be the most unlikely story of...ever, as it not only blows all expectations out of the water, it sinks another, more serious film. Given Rogen's perception by the public at large and the failure to market this any differently than an adult Blart, failure was all but inevitable. Furthermore, with I Love You, Man and Adventureland still in theaters, there were a few too many choices for awkward-dude comedy.
Max Braden: I think the darker material's rating affected business as much as the mixed reviews did. Paul Blart was a PG film while Observe and Report was rated R; all those 15-year-old boys who flocked to the first were locked out of the second. And maybe grossout comedies have finally found the "too far" line with post-vomit kissing.
Reagen Sulewski: I'm actually somewhat impressed that it earned this much - it's a film with a thoroughly unpleasant cast of characters that wasn't even really trying for mainstream success, and would have opened to about $2 million prior to Rogen becoming a name. It's sort of a case of Rogen being too well known at this point to make the counter-culture film. I have to wonder how hard his agent tried to push him away from this.
Gotta catch 'em...er, wait.
Kim Hollis: Dragonball Evolution, which is apparently a theatrical adaptation of well, whatever Dragonball is, opened to $4.8 million and a per location average of $2,132. Say something funny about Dragonball Evolution.
Josh Spiegel: Dragonball's Evolution was into the latest disappearing movie-of-the-week. It also evolved into a film that needed no marketing, since I saw no ads at all for this one.
Brandon Scott: Dragonball evolved into a fetus and died. Sick, but true.
David Mumpower: I...don't think it did, Captain Disturbing.
Tim Briody: Too bad the per screen average sucked so I am robbed of yet another OVER NINE THOUSAAAAAAAAAAAND! joke.
Joel Corcoran: I didn't think anyone could throw under Dragon Wars in the genre of dragon-themed movies, but ... well, there you go.
Sean Collier: Umm.....Pokemon, Strong Bad, Akira, Tentacle Porn, No-Face from Spirited Away, Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers, Street Fighter II...sorry, I got nothin'.
Max Braden: Joel brings up my secret shame - I paid to see Dragon Wars in the theater, but I wouldn't get caught paying to see their balls.
Reagen Sulewski: So opening a movie based on a trend five years afters its audience has outgrown is a bad thing? I had no idea.
David Mumpower: All kidding aside, we've seen this behavior before. In 1999, Digimon was a hugely popular Pokemon clone. The movie was greenlit for October of 2000. By the time it came out, the fad had died. The film wound up earning less than $10 million domestic after an opening weekend of $4.2 million. Once we adjust for inflation, it actually did about a million more than Dragonball, a film I expect to wind up with about $12 million in domestic revenue.