Monday Morning Quarterback Part II
By BOP Staff
October 31, 2012
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Kim Hollis: Silent Hill: Revelation debuted to just $8 million. What do you think of this result? Why aren't more polished-looking horror films as appealing as the low-budget ones?
Edwin Davies: This was a sequel no one wanted to a film people barely remember, so this result is hardly surprising. (It also doesn't help that the video game franchise has become less relevant in the same time period, which must have eroded the audience somewhat.) Couple that with the ads, which were both ridiculous and dull, and you've got a recipe for trouble.
As far as the question of polished horror films, I think that it's more often down to concept than execution, since a solid idea will often draw an audience regardless of the film's budget. However, low-budget films do have a slightly rougher edge to them that can denote danger and the unexpected. If a film looks too shiny and clean then it loses some of its capacity to shock. (Though there are exceptions to that rule: both The Exorcist and The Shining look amazing and are very scary.)
Jay Barney: I wonder if there was a little bit of over saturation of the market with Halloween/horror films. $8 million is not a great opening for a film like this right before Halloween, so you have to wonder what other factors were in play. The $20 million dollar budget will take some of the sting off from the numbers here, but it will have to fight like hell just to pull even with production costs. There is a lot of horror out there at this point. If you take a look at the top 20 films, which is a good breadth of entertainment choices for anyone living in an urban area, the genre is clearly represented. Hotel Transylvania, Paranormal 4, Sinister, Frankenweenie, and ParaNorman were all competing for the same dollars. Silent Hill had competition in this pre-Halloween weekend and it showed.
Max Braden: I think the stark difference between the Silent Hill series and the Resident Evil series is the star. I'm guessing the RE gaming community is larger than the SH community, but by this many sequels, general audiences are probably the driving factor in box office performance. And I think general audiences respond more to the lead actor in polished horror movies than the shock value of the more independent ones. I know who Milla Jovovich is; I can't recall any of the actors in the trailer for Silent Hill: Revelation.
David Mumpower: What I would add is that Silent Hill wasn't even billed as a sequel. The hope would be that consumers forgot the original existed, instead focusing on a better looking product with this reboot. I also think Max's comment is important in that there is no point in casting older, proven thespians such Sean Bean, Malcolm McDowell and Carrie-Anne Moss if the trailers fail to highlight them enough. Of course, in deciding to market that way, they risk losing the teen market that is the lifeblood of horror box office. With regards to why polish seems to hurt a horror production, I believe that paranormal shows and movies have fostered an expectation that low budget shaky cam is requisite for true fear. The early 2000s Japanese remake craze focused on polished premises and those seem outdated to this new generation of teens. The whole process is a moving target. With the Paranormal Activity franchise dying, we're all waiting for the next big concept to drive the market for the next few years.
The problem is that Fun Size is never satisfying
Kim Hollis: The Nickelodeon vehicle Fun Size debuted with just $4.1 million. Why do you believe some of the most popular performers from TV failed to capture a theatrical audience?
Edwin Davies: Just because someone plays a character on a popular TV show doesn't necessarily mean that their fans will have much interest in anything they do that doesn't involve that character. I think that explains part of the reason why Fun Size failed to hit big with the Victoria Justice fans out there.
Felix Quinonez Jr.: I think you can't overstate the fact that on TV, you see them for free. But even so, I think it takes more than one hit for an actor to really be a draw.
Brett Beach: Up until a few weeks ago, my (incorrect) association with this project was that it was a raunchy teen Halloween comedy - the Superbad of fall as it were. Imagine my surprise when I saw the Nickelodeon imprimatur and then discovered that well, yes, it was trying to be the Superbad - of Nickelodeon Films. There's not a lot of ways that could be pulled off successfully, and parents may have balked at a "film for kids" that apparently features a lot o' boob grabbing. I do not know Victoria Justice from Victoria Jackson but I hope that Jane Levy finds the right small screen to big screen transition in the future.
David Mumpower: I agree with what has been said thus far. I would also point out that for whatever reason, Nickelodeon Movies has a spotty record with regards to live action movies. The best analog for Fun Size appears to be Good Burger. Unless you were raised in exactly the right time frame, you'll have to google what this is. Fun Size has opened smaller despite 15 years of box office inflation. Even with lowered expectations and a modest budget, this is still a solid bomb.
That's not gonna be enough to pay Gerard Butler's hairstylist
Kim Hollis: Chasing Mavericks, the concept that expands the 50 Years Flood from Point Break into a full movie, opened to $2.3 million while finishing outside the top 12. What went wrong here?
Max Braden: I did see plenty of Gerard Butler promoting the movie, but a surfing movie at Halloween just feels out of season. Also, when a movie's biggest star is its supporting player to an unknown lead actor, that gives of a subconscious vibe that this is a stepping-stone or training ground movie for the young actor rather than a must-see studio release. I'm only now realizing this was directed by Curtis Hanson. As a film fan, that's a plus and maybe should have been pushed more in the advertising, but his track record is also more of a surprise hit filmmaker than a moneymaker.
Felix Quinonez Jr.: I think they fumbled with the marketing. I have to say I saw very few ads and know very little about the movie. And judging from the reviews the movie was not very good.
Brett Beach: As a somewhat random aside, the single mom of two kids who rented me a room in Beaverton, OR in my early post-divorce months (late 2003) is living back in her hometown of Santa Cruz and is one of the extras in this film. I mention this because, based on the figures, only the extras turned out for this. There was apparently bad karma surrounding this production (Academy winner Curtis Hanson took ill and had to be replaced as director by Michael Apted) and though this based-on-life tale may have had an inspitational pull that could get audiences in the door, without a known quantity and church push a la Soul Surfer, I get the impression there wasn't anything that could be easily sold in the marketing.
David Mumpower: For 15 years now, I've been an ardent supporter of the idea that any quality movie can succeed at any point on the release schedule. This is an instance where the rule is less than absolute. Max is absolutely right that releasing a surfing movie in late October feels like taunting more than anything else. Also, loathe as I am to excuse box office behavior via weather, selling a movie about epic tidal waves the same weekend that Sandy was grabbing headlines was simply horrible timing. So Chasing Mavericks has a stupid concept, a terrible release pattern and rotten timing to boot. It's a clean sweep of suck.