Monday Morning Quarterback Part II
By BOP Staff
June 23, 2009
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Kim Hollis: 2009 has already seen Bride Wars, Confessions of a Shopaholic and especially He's Just Not That Into You become hits. Adding the success of The Proposal, why is this year so ripe for romantic comedies?
Brandon Scott: Perhaps something to make you laugh in a rougher economic time/ more difficult world period, but I have to wonder, are these marks really out of the norm? I mean, Shopaholic really didn't make too much of a mark, and if I recall that was viewed as more disappointment than hit. None of these are watershed blockbuster comedies like Blart or Hangover, so I don't see this as any specifically "ripe" time.
Josh Spiegel: Romantic comedies are always well-received if they're done right. The Proposal had plenty of great buzz and solid enough reviews, so it did well. I'm curious to see how well next month's The Ugly Truth does, as it's also a romantic comedy (though its stars haven't been working as long as Sandra Bullock and Ryan Reynolds) that has been advertising for months. Still, the only one of those previous romantic comedies to do even marginally well as He's Just Not That Into You; The Proposal could end up being a fluke.
Scott Lumley: Intriguingly, I didn't really agree with the premise of the question, so I went and looked it up. Kim's right, it has been a bumper crop of romantic comedies this year. Last year coming into this time frame, the only things that really come close to this type of film are Forgetting Sarah Marshall, Juno, Made of Honor and Baby Mama, and two of those films have very little to do with traditional romance.
I think really this may just be a case of all things being cyclical. 2008 was the year of the superhero. 2009 is the year that cinema got in touch with its feelings.
Jason Lee: Anyone willing to buy into the "bad economy = need for escapism" theory? The idea that people are looking for simple, unadorned films that bring a little happiness into their dealing-with-this-crappy-home-equity-loan lives? Could explain some of what we're seeing from the romcoms as well as films like Blart, Hangover and Up.
Max Braden: In the past I've attributed the tone of movies to the current presidential administration; action movies in the '80s, more dramas in the '90s. I don't know if I'd yet link the light fare this year to Obama, or say that down economies drive people to the movies, but I could believe that the Keep It Simple Stupid approach is working for people under stress from the chaos in the economy.
David Mumpower: With regards to the comments by Josh and Brandon describing the successes of the films in question, you have to make comparisons relative to genre. Confessions of a Shopaholic and Bride Wars combined to make over $100 million. Are they Transformers-sized hits? Of course not. Are they savvy moneymakers for their studios? Absolutely yes. With regards to He's Just Not That Into You, its total is in the $95 million range. That's exemplary for a romantic comedy. With The Proposal apparently headed in that same direction and Ghosts of Girlfriends Past standing as another $50 million winner, this has been a banner year for the genre to date. With regards to the causality, I too fall in line with the thinking that escapism is in right now. A romcom is a much cheaper date and we're in a time of getting back to basics in this regard.
Really, the Cavemen sitcom should have been enough to teach us that no one wants caveman comedy right now.
Kim Hollis: Year One, the Jack Black/Michael Cera caveman comedy, opened to $19.6 million. Do you consider this a win, lose or draw for Sony?
Brandon Scott: It's a draw at best, I would say more of a loss. Its budgeted at roughly $60 million, so it's hard to see it doing any better than recouping that money here, and I don't know that it will even do that. The flipside is this looked so freakin' awful that its almost a win since I can't fathom it making $20 dollars let alone $20 million.
Josh Spiegel: Right now, this is a draw. My guess is that it will drop like an anvil once Transformers Part Deux rolls into town on Wednesday. If, by some wild twist of fate, it doesn't have a drop of at least 55% next weekend, this may end up as a near-win. The movie did look pretty bad, and the reviews have been atrocious, so this one making $20 million is probably the best news Sony could have gotten. Year One will certainly not be as much of a bomb as Land of the Lost, which has to make Sony a little happy.
Reagen Sulewski: If you judge by Jack Black's standards, it's a disappointment, since it throws well under even Nacho Libre. If you judge by stoner comedies, it's well ahead of the game there, and I see this becoming a pretty big rental hit down the road. We've seen better movies flop worse though, so really the situation could have been a lot worse.
Scott Lumley: This is clearly a loss. The actuals for this one showed it coming at fourth on the weekend behind The Proposal, Hangover and the sublime Up. The marketing has been absolutely insane for this one for some time now and those Super Bowl spots did not come cheap. I have no idea how this came in at $60 million either. What were they spending that money on? Was Michael Cera covered in real gold in that one commercial?
Sony had better pray this becomes a cult hit, because if it does they might break even on it in about four years.
Jason Lee: I agree with Scott that this couldn't have been cheap but at the same time, as a throwback genre comedy, I really can't see this film doing better than it did. I just don't see Life of Brian-esque films opening over $25 mil in this day and age.
Max Braden: I'd call it a loss given the amount of advertising we saw for it. When a studio's behind a project that much it tells me they're banking on a big opening, and a sub-$20 million debut can't be considered that big for all the effort. But hey, it beat Land of the Lost, so...
David Mumpower: The film's reported production budget is $60 million, but many of you have keyed upon the much more important aspect. The negative cost here is much pricier since they have been whoring Michael Cera and Jack Black out to anyone who will have them. Also, the commercials have been running non-stop, which is a mistake since the footage from the film is what sells it the least. I had commented a few months ago that Year One and Land of the Lost seemed to be aping History of the World Part I in all the wrong ways. With sub-par openings of $18.8 million and now $19.6 million, consumers have reinforced this idea. Both of these "comedies" look painful with the end result being that each one will require home video revenue to make a profit. Neither of them is leaving theaters in the black.
Well, that Captain Caveman movie isn't getting made anytime soon
Kim Hollis: Out of the "caveman comedy" stars, who is most and least affected by their middling results - Will Ferrell, Jack Black, Michael Cera or someone else?
Brandon Scott: Cera had a chance (a long shot in my opinion, since I don't forecast it for him) for stardom and it didn't translate since Year One had a middling result. He isn't charismatic enough to hold a mass audience, a poor mans/nerdier guy's version of Seth Rogen. Black is what he is...he'll never become a mega-star but he has a strong niche audience, and will always be valued in voice-over roles as well as the manic-hyper personalities he can play, so his career is set. I think Ferrell is the one most affected in a bad way. While I don't think he is out of luck by any stretch going forward, he really needs the right vehicle to have a hit. He can't just have a hit by showing up. He wants Anchorman 2 more than ever before now. I like Ferrell, but he can't play a four-year old forever, either. I think with Land of the Lost, he just made a bad choice to do the movie. It happens and I think he, similar to Black, is kind of what he is from a stardom standpoint.
Josh Spiegel: I'd say that Cera takes the biggest hit. Part of this is due to the fact that Will Ferrell and Jack Black, love them or hate them, are outsized personalities; when you see one of their comedies, you normally have a pretty good idea of what you're getting. Ferrell has the best track record (spotty as it is); Black has had more success as a loudmouth goofball as a supporting actor. Even though Cera arguably is similarly one-note (similar in that he really only has one-note), his awkwardness may not pan out. I'm not sure that he has a niche audience like Black or Ferrell (excluding his involvement in Arrested Development, which guarantees him a small niche audience - as long as he agrees to do a movie of the show); he'd have to find a film that could lead to Superbad-like success to push him back into the stratosphere.
Reagen Sulewski: I guess if you're talking opportunity cost, Cera takes the hit, as this could have made him into a bigger star (he's no leading man, though, and I don't think he feels he is either). He basically just goes back to the same situation he had before the movie. In terms of who gets their asking price reduced, I think Black gets the biggest hit, since it's him doing his usual stuff and it came in two-thirds lower than a Jack Black film should.
Scott Lumley: I really don't think any of these guys take a major hit on this. Cera was the only genuinely funny thing in all of the Year One trailers that I saw. Black is set with his niche audience and Ferrell is pretty much invulnerable. I don't see any of these guys ceasing to get film roles any time soon. If Year One is a swing and a miss, I think we need to blame the producers and the script, I don't think we can blame Cera or Black for that one.
Jason Lee: Call me crazy, but I think Cera benefits from this. This is a solid (if unimpressive) opening that paired Cera with one of the more bankable comedy stars of his generation with above-the-line treatment in a highly marketed film. I think if Year One had opened around $12 or $13 million, this would be a different story but nearly $20 million with a tongue-in-cheek comedy is acceptable in my book.
David Mumpower: I'm going to go a different way with my answer. I think all three have serious concerns at the moment. Michael Cera has yet to show he can do anything other than a Woody Allen impersonation. The bumbling awkwardness has played well as a nerdish teen in Juno and Superbad, but how much longer can he keep playing the same roles? The shelf life on it is short. As for Jack Black, he's the cautionary tale for such a situation. People know exactly what they're getting with him in films, and I don't mean that in a good way. He needs to do something new and surprising and he needs to do it soon. With regards to Will Ferrell, two of his last three films are disastrous and the other, Step Brothers, has more critics than fans. His expiration date may have already come.