Monday Morning Quarterback Part II
By BOP Staff
January 19, 2010
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Kim Hollis: The Book of Eli, the Denzel Washington film about life after an apocalypse, earned $32.8 million from Friday-to-Sunday, making it the third biggest January opener of all-time; its four-day holiday estimate is $38.0 million. How did Warner Bros. accomplish such an impressive debut?
Josh Spiegel: Denzel Washington. That's the answer. Denzel, Denzel, Denzel. I realize that the movie is also religiously themed, but honestly, if I hadn't read reviews stating this, I'm not sure I'd know it. So, it's all about Denzel Washington, who can draw audiences if action's involved. Also, this is the first movie since Sherlock Holmes that may attract teenage audiences. Granted, Avatar took the weekend, but there's only so many times people can see that movie. Denzel reaps those rewards.
Michael Lynderey: That Book of Eli opening may have actually gone under some people's expectations, but it's absolutely incomprehensible to me. Washington's last movie, The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3, had a big name co-star (John Travolta), a comparatively catchy premise, better trailers, and a summer release date, and all it could muster up is a $23 million opening. On the other hand, The Book of Eli just looks like Denzel fighting off some goons in a dusty alley, and it opens with $31 million, bigger than all but one of his films? Okay. Maybe the January landscape is changing in a permanent way - morphing into a region where openings on the scale of this one don't look out of place at all. Movies with big name actors seem to be benefiting the most from this development.
Daron Aldridge: This opening is pure Denzel. I won't repeat his name three times in a row like Josh, out of fear that he will jump out of my mirror a la Bloody Mary or Candyman and give me a righteous, impassioned scolding. The man continues to be a consistent opener film after film, regardless of quality. I would also argue that the film benefited because it came at a time when the usual press promo destination of late night shows was spiking in viewership (thanks to the Irish-hating NBC). Gary Oldman appeared on The Tonight Show with Conan, Mila Kunis stopped by Craig Ferguson, and Mr. Washington visited David Letterman last Thursday AND Jay Leno in primetime on January 7th. So, it didn't hurt to have clips of the movie (which all prominently featured Denzel, of course) in front of more eyes than it would have been...say...in November. Just a idea.
Jason Lee: While I don't agree that Denzel was a huge part of this opening (can you imagine any other lead actor opening this film above $25 million?) I will say that dark, dystopic films tend to do well in January. I think that after the saccharine sweetness of the holidays, moviegoers were ready for a little anarchy.
Matthew Huntley: There are a few reasons for this debut: 1) The ever reliable Denzel Washington factor - the actor has a reputation for starring in consistently entertaining projects, even if they are sometimes underwhelming. But they're mostly solid and audiences will pay for solid; 2) Warner Bros. waited just long enough after the behemoth that continues to be Avatar and offered audiences a down and dirty alternative to the glossy Na'vi and friends; 3) It's Martin Luther King Jr. weekend, and the studio opened a movie starring one of the most popular African American actors of all time just as the country celebrates one of the greatest African Americans of all time. This doesn't seem like a coincidence.
Shalimar Sahota: The marketing was excellent (even the tagline) because it made you want to find what exactly Eli was carrying. A few TV spots, reviewers and even the Hughes Brothers have let slip what it is, but then that isn't the film's biggest secret. After seeing the teaser trailer back in the summer, I found myself looking forward to this more than Avatar. If word-of-mouth spreads to the same Christian audience that flocked to The Passion of the Christ then it could finish somewhere in the region of $120-$130 million. Maybe even twice as much worldwide. However, it faces another religious firecracker in the shape of Legion.
George Rose: The only answer I can come up with is that we all continue to underestimate Denzel Washington. To be honest, I thought this movie looked stupid. So much is thrown into the trailer and commercials that I actually have no idea what this movie is about. All I can muster up is that there are some religious references and an apocalypse, all tied together with some explosions and Denzel weilding a machette. I was given so little substance in the promotions - letting me know that the letters E, L, and I appear in words like "bELIeve" and "dELIver" is not very helpful advertising - that I decided to skip going to the movies and save my money to buy liqour for the long MLK weekend. Aparently my friends and I were alone in that thinking. We all know that Denzel is a well known actor, but when lackluster commercials came out for this January release, it felt safe to expect the worst. As it turns out, Denzel really is an A-list actor, someone who can open a movie, no matter how bad it looks, during any month of the year. The success of Eli puts a lot of pressure on Mel Gibson and his equally unappealing January release called Edge of Darkness. Denzel proved his celebrity, can Mel?
Reagen Sulewski: I wouldn't read much if at all into the genre of the film being right for the post-Christmas slot, especially since we're just a couple years removed from I Am Legend cleaning up during Christmas. People don't really pay attention to tone so much as whether the movie is sold well, which Eli was. I think there's a little bit of an idea of the film having more attention available to it this time of year though (Avatar aside), and it's gotten huge support from the studio, with the ads being just on the edge of overexposure. This is one of those situations where it's difficult to pin it on any one thing because so many parts were done well.
Kim Hollis: I agree that it's a combination of factors. Great marketing (the ads were everywhere, and they were intriguing), the presence of Denzel and Gary Oldman (not to mention Mila Kunis looking very cool), and an appeal to an oddly conservative audience segment, apparently. Warner Bros. has been on a pretty solid roll with regards to strong pushes for awareness in advance of theatrical release.
David Mumpower: If we want to reinforce the idea that Denzel is the key, nine out of his previous 12 films had opened north of $20 million. Similarly, those same nine films all earned north of $50 million. Anyone who doesn't believe an actor can open/sell movies needs to look long and hard at his resume. Having said that, I believe a key to the success of The Book Of Eli is that Washington was given a worthy foil in Gary Oldman. If you're picking the best actors in the industry in terms of track record of heroes and villains, they're both on the short list of demonstrative greatness. January release or not, this is a must-watch project due to the presence of those two men. And while the story usually isn't enough to sell a film on its own, the premise of a man protecting the last copy of the Bible in a post-apocalyptic word is inspired.
Kevin Chen: Dude, spoiler alert. Based on the trailers, I was convinced the book was the last remaining copy of New Moon.