Monday Morning Quarterback
By BOP Staff
July 12, 2010
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Kim Hollis: Despicable Me, the latest 3D animated feature, opened to $56.4 million. How did Universal pull off such an impressive debut in a field in which they've had little prior success?
Josh Spiegel: Marketing and 3D. I've been seeing ads for this film for the past year, and Universal has been relentless. Obviously, it helps that the reviews are positive (if not as glowing as they were for Toy Story 3 or How to Train Your Dragon), but advertising the movie nonstop for the past year, and highlighting odd and different elements in pretty much each ad, has helped. Moreover, the 3D elements have seemed, almost from the get-go, as necessary to enjoying the movie. Toy Story 3 has 3D that is subtle; Despicable Me has 3D that is meant to be eye-popping. Universal did the job right here.
Brett Beach: I second the abundance of ads and reviews that considering this summer's first half, were generous enough that they sounded like high praise. I don't get out to the theaters much any more but have seen spots tying in for this nightly on Wheel of Fortune (IHOP has several "Minion"-inspired platters) and on pretty much every NBC show for the last three months (including a skin-crawling one during Last Comic Standing, where someone in a huge Minion suit got on stage and the three judges on the panel looked like they weren't being paid enough to shill for this). The 30 second spots I did see highlighted the right amount of clever dialogue ("It's soo fluffy!) and juvenile humor ("I said 'dart gun', not ...." and the mini toilet spewing out water). My girlfriend cracks up at the Minions everytime so I can only imagine what the kids think.
Tom Houseman: When it comes to animated films, it's clear that quality counts. Every ad makes this movie look hilarious (when was the last time I actually laughed at a fart joke? Despicable Me got me with the fart gun), and obviously that got kids and their parents to want to see it. I'm not remotely surprised that this film did so well, and I expect it to have very good legs.
Matthew Huntley: Everybody seems to be mentioning all the movie's funny ads and trailers, not to mention the abundance of advertising, but I guess I don't feel as hounded by Despicable Me as, say, Inception or Twilight. With that said, I'm only one person and I agree with the rest of the group that Universal has been pushing the movie for a long time (I just don't feel as bombarded by it as other films). And it's not just Universal and its parent-company, NBC, but also Best Buy, with all their tie-ins to the Minion characters' dialogue. The studio did their job of making it out to be July's first big event movie and it paid off.
Generally, though, I guess it seemed like a different kind of animated feature for family audiences, and not just families, but also teenagers and couples. The movie is sort of universal in its appeal (just like Toy Story), but also different and original enough so that it became a must-see. Audiences are obviously swayed by the different (so long as it's marketed in mainstream fashion).
David Mumpower: I think everyone has hit on the key element here. Universal is aware of their lack of recognition in the animated movie marketplace. They took the time to analyze the requisite elements key to a massive opening weekend. I had been split on this project in that I loved the trailers, but I was scared off by Universal's track record. In the end, they effectively bought the opening weekend by making the aforementioned Minions omnipresent. If you pull up Facebook, there they are. If you go to Best Buy, there they are. If you turn on a television, well, you get the point. And the key is that they're adorable. If they were annoying and lowest common denominator, the film would have failed, but the marketing campaign correctly deduced how engaging they are as well as the why of it. The advertising understands the heart of the film, and we don't see enough of that these days. This is a tremendous job all around and Universal has earned their well deserved victory lap here.
As an aside, I think that the recent quality of How to Train Your Dragon and Toy Story 3 also helped in that consumers have been given significant positive reinforcement by their 2010 animated films, Shrek excluded. That entices them to give a new property like Despicable Me the benefit of the doubt. That's an underrated aspect of the industry in that one studio can be opportunistic by capitalizing off the hard work of their competitors. People are always so focused on that element of competition, but this is the thread in the tapestry that isn't given enough consideration. A movie can draft off of prior quality releases. The summer box office campaign has been a struggle due to the fact that this sort of positive reinforcement hasn't been created by enough releases. Action films in particular could have used that boost.
Kim Hollis: I do think that along with the stellar marketing, there's something to the fact that Despicable Me looks different than other animated offerings. There's always something interesting about seeing stories told from the side of the "villain". On top of that, it looked pretty clear that this movie also has a heavy emphasis on family connections, and those sorts of stories always seem to attract a wide ranging audience.
I really need a minion or two
Kim Hollis: How much of the success of Despicable Me do you attribute to the quality of the trailers as opposed to the ubiquity of the minions on Facebook, at Best Buy and even on BOP (much to the chagrin of some of our readers)?
Josh Spiegel: Ubiquity is sometimes the best thing that happens in a marketing campaign, even if it winds up being slightly obnoxious. My iffiness at seeing this movie is that those ads and trailers are all doing their best to not show me much of anything in the movie, as opposed to silly characters talking in gibberish. Also, as much as I'm glad to see Best Buy encouraging people to use their cell phones in a movie, I'm not sure it's wise to enhance audience participation in this fashion.
Tom Houseman: There was a painfully shameless plug for Despicable Me on Last Comic Standing a couple weeks ago. I don't think the tidal wave of advertising would have mattered if they didn't make the film look good, though.
Brett Beach: Ubiquity can either be gaga fantastic or tooth-pullingly agonizing. In this case, I lean towards the former, even if I tired of the ads sometime around early May. I think the Minions are a big part of the sell for this movie and keeping them in the forefront of trailers and promotions was smart. In a way they're like cartoon creatures with mogwai and gremlin characteristics all rolled into one (cute and cuddly and obnoxious and crude). In other words, just like kids. Parents probably felt they would be laughing just as hard, if not harder at the jokes, and not simply because of pop culture bytes (a la Shrek.)
Matthew Huntley: I agree with Tom on this and believe the movie's success was conditional on two things: the ubiquity of the ads and effectiveness of the ads to make the movie look good. A studio can market a movie all they want (and we all know they do), but if their marketing can't make the source look appealing, it's all for not. If any of the ads affected me, it was the trailer that featured Gru (the main character) popping the little kid's balloon. The Minions did nothing for me, although I can't speak for all the kids who saw these cute, yellow creatures and asked their parents to take them. My conclusion: the trailers were directed toward teens and adults and the Minions were aimed at kids. It'd be interesting to get a kid's opinion on Kim's question.
David Mumpower: Minions rule. It's that simple. I am unclear on whether they are more aptly described as the Woody and Buzz of Despicable Me or the Space Aliens. Whatever the case may be, I became a fan of them on Facebook ages ago and I've been cracking up over all of the updates. The Twilight one was particularly funny. If you haven't checked it out yet, go here: http://www.facebook.com/minions
Kim Hollis: I have to agree that the Minions seem to have carried the day here, and I think they're all the more important in the word-of-mouth because people are talking about how much they enjoyed them. I think that animated movies that have hooks like this always have a great shot at pulling in audience (see also: Rhino, the hamster in a ball in Bolt).
They're kind of like animated characters anyway
Kim Hollis: Ordinarily we say that voice actors in animated films don't impact the bottom line that much, but Despicable Me took the unusual step of showing Steve Carell and Jason Segel in the commercials. Do you think this positively impacted the box office? Also, do you think either of these actors (or Russell Brand) will get a bump from the film?
Josh Spiegel: I must have missed those ads; I've seen interviews with the actors, but never that old saw of showing, in split screen, the character and respective actor performing. I don't think it matters much, really. The only actor who could get an immediate bump is Carell, as Dinner for Schmucks opens later this month. Still, I doubt the two movies will show much overlap.
Matthew Huntley: Yes, because the commercials featuring Carell and Segel (when they're fighting each other with Rock 'em Sock 'em Robots) reminded adults, especially young adults watching ESPN (on which this commercial mostly aired), that "the guy from The Office and 40-Year-Old Virgin" and "the guy from How I Met Your Mother and Forgetting Sarah Marshall" were lending their voices to an animated feature. When they saw this, they were probably more tempted to see the movie because of Carell and Segel's usual brand of humor. Right there, you have more adults wanting to see the movie.
Yes, I do think Carell will get a bump from the film, but not so much Segel or Brand. Carell's voice is the most recognizable and he proves he can do a funny accent. The other two are as distinguishable.
David Mumpower: None of us has an empirical basis for the conclusion since it's impossible to quantify, but I am of the opinion that those ads aided the box office. Universal made the correct determination to tie those ads in with ESPN during a time when the network was experiencing unusually high ratings for the month of July due to the NBA free agency story. So, they had the eyeballs and managed to tie the stars of two well regarded films, The 40-Year-Old Virgin and Forgetting Sarah Marshall, together for consumers. I don't think either actor gets a huge bump from this and I'm inclined to believe that since Carell is already an established lead, Segel is the only one who gets much aid from the whole thing. I do, however, believe that other studios have paid careful attention to this turn of events and will try to find avenues to exploit this type of marketing in the future. If you're going to pay a star to talk into a microphone, you should do everything possible to notify consumers of this. Of course, I believe that nine times out of ten it's better to discover a Mark Walton, voice of Rhino in Bolt, than it is to overpay a famous actor. Despicable Me happens to be that tenth time.
Kim Hollis: I also think that having Carell and Segel in the commercials provided a slight boost to the box office of Despicable Me. Since they're both recognizable from both TV and film at this point, a lot of fans can make a connection that a guy they like is a voice in this movie. Ordinarily, I'm not so sure that voice acting matters, but in this case, the fact that Universal went out of their way to promote Carell and Segel gave the impression that there's something special about their presence in the film.
If you hear a creepy chattering noise...
Kim Hollis: Predators, the re-boot/sequel to the long-standing franchise, earned $24.8 million. How should Fox feel about this result?
Josh Spiegel: It cost Fox $40 million to make and they buried it with awful, nonexistent marketing, so they ought to be dancing in the boardrooms. I was genuinely surprised to realize that this movie was opening on July 9th when I found out about ten days ago. I saw nothing on TV for this one, and if Fox was trying to blanket sports coverage with ads, they did only a good enough job of appealing to the core audience, and no one else. Still, a solid result.
Brett Beach: I think Fox should be quite happy and Adrien Brody should be especially pleased that he wasn't in two box office duds within the space of five weeks. This figure probably has just as much to do with highlighting Robert Rodriguez's name in the ads (much like Quentin presenting Hostel or Hero) as it does with convincing the core audience (who apparently were aware of it) that this would be a lean mean action film and in its own way a throwback to '80s fare.
Matthew Huntley: Definitely agree with Josh and Brett on their interpretations (although I don't think Rodriguez's name had as much to do with it as the name "Predators"). I've been seeing the trailers for Predators for a while now, but it wasn't until last Wednesday that I was aware it was opening this weekend. It goes to show that a trusted franchise with a built-in fan base can sell itself and doesn't need millions of dollars of marketing to open respectably. With such a low production budget, good reviews (which may translate to longer legs) and what seems to be a relatively low-cost marketing campaign, this film should be in the black before it goes international. So yeah, I'd say Fox has every cause to celebrate, especially after The A-Team and Knight and Day struggled during the month of June.
Shalimar Sahota: This one hit bang on target. Probably in much the same way how The Karate Kid and The A-Team got people wanting to relive the '80s a few weeks back, so too did Predators! Along with teenagers wanting R-rated thrills, the good reviews might have also brought in the older generation. I took my father to see it, and we both seemed to agree that it was good, just what we expected from a Predator film. However, I was a bit surprised to also see walking out of the auditorium with us a woman who looked like she was about 70-years-old! I think part of its success (and one of the reasons it drew me in) is the completely diverse cast. Whereas the first one was all muscular men, having the mix of Adrien Brody, Alice Braga and Topher Grace in here is a great change. That it opened better than Fox's Knight and Day is a surprise. I'll be even more surprised if it outgrosses it in the long run.
David Mumpower: This is a situation akin to A Nightmare on Elm Street in that there hadn't been a true Predators movie in almost 20 years, but there had been a franchise merger with a competing icon. Alien vs. Predator was a good idea that was relatively well executed and earned $80 million domestically. Its sequel was ill-considered yet profitable due to the modest $40 million production budget. When we discuss how the quality of the previous film directly correlates to the opening weekend of its successor, Predators is difficult to evaluate in this regard. AvP - Requiem isn't cut and dried in relation to the latest project, which is why it was savvy of Fox to ignore it, emphasizing a new and fresh idea. Mankind as the hunted on a foreign planet is a killer concept and I always felt that the trailers cleverly marketed the element of surprise in that idea. This feels like a win albeit a modest one. The franchise has been redeemed after the Requiem misstep and Predators will wind up profitable before it leaves theaters to boot.
Reagen Sulewski: I'm moderately surprised that this cracked $25 million, as it had more question marks than a Super Mario Bros. level. Adrien Brody as an Schwarzenegger replacement? Surprisingly effective. Yet another Predators sequel? Apparently wanted. Some director named Nimrod? Hungarians rock, I guess.
But if we're going to have reboots of long-aged franchises, I'd prefer it's action movies like this rather than cynical recycling of slasher franchises with the gore amped up. Robert Rodriguez knows what he's doing.
Kim Hollis: I'm frankly surprised it did this well. I thought the film looked very average, with very little to distinguish it from any other '80s remake/reboot/sequel/whatever. Obviously, the Predator name recognition will still draw a certain audience, and since the movie is supposed to be pretty decent, it might be able to pull off a decent theatrical run. At the least, this is solid early advertising for its home video release, where Predators will certainly prosper.