Trailer Hitch Part I
By BOP Staff
April 7, 2010
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Tron Legacy – Opens December 17th
Michael Lynderey: I kind of have to ask the same question here as I do about The Last Airbender. Why is everybody saying Tron: Legacy will be so huge? The first movie pulled in $33 million. I don't doubt that it has a big cult following, but so does Killer Klowns From Outer Space. So what gives?
As for the trailer... well, it sounds like they used some music from Watchmen, and that's good, because I loved Watchmen.
Josh Spiegel: I haven't seen the original and, before this trailer and the ensuing hoopla, all I knew of the film was its put-down reference in a Simpsons Treehouse of Horror ("Has anyone here seen Tron?" "No." "No." "No." "No." "Yes. I mean, no."). And that trailer is amazing. The movie may be a letdown, but I'm ready. Bridges plus cool effects is, oddly, enough to get me in the theater.
I have no idea if the movie will be huge and, like Michael, I'm not sure that it's got enough of an audience. But I'm sold on this one.
David Mumpower: Michael, Josh's answer is why I'm starting to believe Tron Legacy will be a juggernaut. Most people only know the word Tron and have never seen the movie. I've seen it several times, but all I remember about it is that it was shiny. As fate would have it, the two primary stars from that movie, Bruce Boxleitner and Jeff Bridges, wound up having extended careers, which means that this is the rare cult film with recognizable names, one of whom recently was named the Best Actor at the Oscars. This is something Killer Klowns from Outer Space cannot claim. Is Bridges a box office draw? Of course not. And I have to say that on paper, I still would not expect this to be a winner since I see it in the same light as Clash of the Titans. Yes, there is name recognition, but I don't know how much it helps.
Why, then, do I believe this is a blockbuster? If Tron was shiny, I do not even have the words to define what Tron Legacy is. This is a Pink Floyd laser lights show, the best fireworks presentation of all time, and HDNet's Bikini Destinations all rolled up into one. We have been trying to quantify the 3-D phenomenon for going on two years now and it's been a focus of the site since last January. This is at worst the second best looking film in terms of incorporating the new technology and I am of the opinion that it blows Avatar away in this regard. It's Avatar++ in terms of visuals.
Now, I do not believe that this alone would be enough to sell every film. This is the unfortunate lesson we learned from Speed Racer, an aesthetically gripping production that mainstream consumers felt did not have enough going for it otherwise. Tron Legacy can escape that fate, because it does have a great story to sell. A mysterious father drops off the face of the planet and a son searching for his absentee dad accidentally discovers a world that makes The Matrix look like Candy Land. I also think that the casting of Olivia Wilde is inspired since she gives great vixen and I believe that this could break her as the next Angelina Jolie.
Stating the obvious, I think the world of this trailer and it makes me believe we are looking at a potential box office juggernaut here. I worry about the Speed Racer scenario, but I see Clash of the Titans as the worst case scenario for this December release. I'm expecting box office north of $200 million as long as the movie doesn't prove to be a bust, which is a distinct possibility. The original is notoriously complex.
Jim Van Nest: I think this boils down to age. I grew up at the beginning of the video game age. The beginning of the special effects age. The Tron game and movie were among my favorites. And while you mention Jeff Bridges as not being that much of a draw, for me, hearing his voice two thirds of the way through the new trailer sealed it for me.
I hadn't read a lot about the project, so I wasn't aware Bridges was involved. I'm of the opinion that he had to be, but c'mon, his involvement wasn't necessary to get the project off the ground.
The visuals are fantastic and to me, the original Tron should have been in 3D. This is a movie that HAS to be in 3D. It's perfect for it. Tron is just behind the REAL Avatar on my must see list for the year.
And something you can't discount either is that even though my kids haven't seen the original yet, I'll be taking them to see Legacy, because of how much I loved the original. (I'm sure we'll check out the original before the new one, though.)
Michael Lynderey: David, I sort of understand it now. You're saying it's basically the visuals that are going to be a huge draw here, rather than a massive silent majority of Tron fans just salivating to see a sequel. Fair enough. I wasn't personally much vowed by the trailer, but I'm the guy who thought Did You Hear About the Morgans? was a better looking movie than Avatar (I'll take Wyoming over Pandora any day).
Max Braden: As with Wall Street, on paper I really love the idea of revisiting characters 20-30 years after the original events. The Tron sequel teaser really concerned me because it looked like they just put some actors against a green screen with some average cgi behind them. If any movie called for James Cameron's cutting edge 3D/cgi treatment, it was a Tron sequel, and here this looked like they hadn't progressed much further with the ghost in the machine concept than Lawnmower Man. (Personally, I happen to prefer the rigid frames of the first Tron over this fluid motion in the teaser, but I can understand the update). The second trailer, though, is a big improvement, and actually makes me want to see the movie. I'm not sure the plot of Flynn's disappearance makes a lot of continuity sense since we last saw Flynn getting in a helicopter as the new head of Encom, but I'm willing to see where they go with it. And even if a moviegoer knows nothing about the first Tron, I think the combination of extreme sports and gaming will be enough to get them interested. But that's a limited audience. I see this grossing much closer to $100 million than $200 million.
David Mumpower: Max, here is why I think you are putting an artificial ceiling on the movie's box office upside with your last sentence. There are two factors. The first is that shiny is what sells right now. If anyone had told you six months ago that Avatar and Alice in Wonderland would earn a billion dollars in domestic revenue, you would have looked at them like they had dozens of spiders crawling out of their mouth. Tron Legacy has shiny like I cannot describe in words. This is the literal implementation of seeing is believing. The other is that December box office behavior works differently than any other time of the year. If Tron Legacy is good, word will spread immediately through viral communication. People who haven't seen Tron won't care about that aspect. They'll focus on the fact that the movie that looks good is good. Over the holidays, all consumers want is to be entertained and that rising tide lifts all boats. If Tron Legacy is perceived as the primary title in release, a possibility I cannot rule out at the moment, I Am Legend box office is not impossible. Right now, I understand the desire to be conservative with your estimate but I also believe it's an imperative for us as box office analysts to keep our minds open to all possibilities. If there are more Tron Legacy trailers coming that improve on this one, it will earn $100 million in days, not weeks.
Michael Lynderey: If what you say is true, I'm a little puzzled at how a sequel to what is frankly a little old movie is now pegged to be a $200m+ earner. Is it really so easy as to put shiny on screen and watch the dough roll in, or is there more to it? And if there's not, maybe my real question is, did the movie even have to be called "Tron" or be a sequel to anything to be as (presumably) successful as it will be?
p.s.: Speed Racer.
David Mumpower: I feel we're putting that theory to the test with Tron Legacy. How much of a selling point is the best looking 3-D right now? I have said that I believe the primary selling point of Clash of the Titans is the Kraken's implementation. That was what drew people into theaters. What happens when we have a film eerily similar in terms of roots but that looks a lot better and is released during the most lucrative period on the box office calendar? This will be a fascinating box office experiment.
Michael Lynderey: I'm really speculating now since we don't have the box office results quite yet, but I have to wonder if the movie wouldn't have been bigger if it was just a new property, and didn't have the name attachment to an older film that much of its target audience has not seen? Sort of like what The Matrix did in 1999.
David Mumpower: I think I'll have to watch it before I can make the final determination on that. My instinct is that the one brief shot of Jeff Bridges' face exemplifies the perfect way to tie it back to a semi-known property. The rest of it is the eye candy that sells it as something new and different in cinematic special effects.
Is it self-fulfilling prophecy if we give The A-Team trailer an A?
The A-Team – Opens June 11th
Josh Spiegel: Again, here's something I'm not that familiar with, being too young to have watched the show when it was on, but this trailer looks like it's for an exciting enough movie. That said, the makeup that's meant to make Liam Neeson look as old as the character from the TV show just seems odd. Still, Sharlto Copley getting a role in a big movie is exciting. However...isn't this essentially the plot of The Losers? Or vice versa? Either way, I'm tentatively in for this one.
Michael Lynderey: Michael Lynderey: Oh yeah, it's The Losers all over again but not quite yet. Funny how The Losers was briefly moved up to one week before The A-Team, before scurrying back to April.
Really, this reminds me of G.I. Joe - it's not an outright huge property, but it has enough fans, and the cast doesn't push it over-the-top, but they're certainly good enough to make it a decent hit. It's tough to judge the quality of this (the trailer is decent), but I think the desired $100 million result will probably be in the bag here, especially considering how dead early June is.
David Mumpower: For the purpose of symmetry, Liam Neeson should have starred in a Breakfast at Tiffany's re-make first.
Brett Beach: Not that the world needs a faithful adaptation of The A-Team but I am impressed by how the trailer suggests the movie will perfectly capture the precise level of ridiculousness of the show - skirting just over into camp - and with full-on action set pieces like the show had, just exponentially bang-boom-pow-ier. It looks like the kind of action-packed yet goofy summer escapist fare that isn't done much anymore, or at least not done well.
Per David's comment , I concur. I see you a Breakfast at Tiffany's and raise you a Damnation Alley.
David Mumpower: Well played, Brett. As for the movie itself, one of the primary challenges in adapting a well established property is exploiting the most popular aspects of the original work without doing so in a gratuitous manner. Star Trek is the gold standard in this regard and will remain that way for years to come. What jumps out at me about The A-Team's trailer is that a deft touch is used for a couple of ideas that a less confident production would have left out altogether. "I pity the fool" is one of the all-time great catchphrases in the entertainment industry. Having that dialogue shown instead of spoken is a phenomenal diversion of expectation. Similarly, I love the whistling of the television show theme as a signal to one another about their status in an operation. It's much more subtle than banging the song over our heads like has been done (and done well...I'm not bagging on it) in Mission: Impossible. For a decade now, I've been cringing at the idea of an A-Team adaptation yet now that we are faced with one, I'm shocked to find myself saying I think Joe Carnahan has gotten this one right.
Max Braden: I like the casting a lot, but I think they went too on the nose with Murdock's character, especially in the narrated trailer. Neeson just doesn't have the charm to pantomime George Peppard. They could have gone with a more Taken vibe for him. I didn't watch the original S.W.A.T. series but I got the impression that the movie lived up to the spirit of the show without being too paint by numbers. The Jessica Biel trailer does promise a lot of chaotic fun, and I'd expect a lot of viewers to ask if this was directed by Michael Bay or McG. Basically it's the male version of Charlie's Angels. This should do very well.