Monday Morning Quarterback Part IV
By BOP Staff
July 11, 2013
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Jay Barney: Despite what I just wrote with the Disney analysis, yes I think his status as the number one star in the world has waned a bit. I am not exactly sure what that means, though, because he is still one of the biggest draws in the world. So what if he is not number one? Just being in the discussion as one of the top stars means they have a track record of success. We don't even need to take a look at the start of his global stardom, just look at the last three years. Pirates of the Caribbean IV made over $1 billion. Alice in Wonderland made over $1 billion. He may not ever be the "clear" #1 again, but Dark Shadows and Lone Ranger aren't enough to pull him out of the discussion.
Edwin Davies: To me, Johnny Depp was never one of the biggest stars in the world: Jack Sparrow was. Depp's one of those people who's pretty much always been famous, always been in the public eye and always able to get work, but he was never really a huge draw in his own right. But he was able to star in lots of small, interesting films and build a reputation as everyone's favorite actor, and occasionally he'd be in a film like Sleepy Hollow which did really well.
Then the first Pirates film came out and he suddenly became a whole new level of famous. That success carried over into Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and Alice in Wonderland, both of which benefited from his prior relationship with Tim Burton and beloved source material, and obviously fed into the success of the Pirates sequels. However, all of these films either featured Jack Sparrow or had Depp play a character which basically filled the Jack Sparrow space; quirky, off-kilter supporting character who played off of leads who just had to be straight-men/women to his antics. If you look beyond these films, though, we see that most of the films he has appeared in have gravitated to the same sort of level that he achieved prior to the Pirates films. Some, like Public Enemies, do better than others, but generally they just do okay. Having Johnny Depp in them no doubt helped films like Finding Neverland and Secret Window to do better than they would have otherwise, but his involvement in them didn't make them huge hits just by his presence. If he wasn't wearing a pirate hat or walking through black and white striped landscapes, he wasn't that big of a draw.
What's changed now, as far as I'm concerned, is that people have soured on the Pirates films, which peaked commercially with the second one and saw diminishing returns from there. Now, the fifth Pirates film will still probably do really well, better than it probably deserves to, but Depp's career in general seems to be slowly reverting back to the mean, something which not coincidentally coincides with the decline in popularity of his most famous character.
Bruce Hall: I agree with Jay; it's kind of academic. Maybe Depp is kazillionaire number one, or maybe he's kazillionaire number three. Either way, Disney just sank over a quarter billion dollars into a franchise built around him, because he's Jack Freaking Sparrow. Depp is one of those rare stars who has found ways to satisfy his creative needs AND remain financially and critically relevant enough to have fun and take risks. He shows no sign of slowing down and audiences will forgive him The Lone Ranger because A) It's not his fault and B) Whatever his next role is, they'll be able to see his pretty face again.
Daron Aldridge: I agree he will recover at least for a few years until this cycle of superstardom works its way through. But this one may sting more than Dark Shadows because Tonto is exponentially more recognizable than Barnabas the vampire.
I would argue the coronation of Depp as the "number one box office star in the world," though. That crown seems more fitting atop Robert Downey Jr.'s head. Bear with me: Since 2008's Iron Man, Downey has been the lead or an above the title draw in nine films (yes, I excluded his Hulk cameo) with an average global gross of $600 million per film ($255 million in North America). Since 2003's Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl, Depp has similarly starred in 15 films with an average global take of $443.9 million ($159.6 million domestically). These were their introductions, as Edwin put it, to the "whole new level of famous." Downey hasn't quite had the misfire yet, thanks to Marvel, but he is also only five years into this run. To play devil's advocate with myself a bit, those numbers equate to Depp's non-domestic tally accounting for 64 percent of his global gross compared to Downey's non-domestic gross being 57 percent of his global numbers. So percentage-wise Depp is slightly bigger.
Max Braden: The silver lining I heard from the Lone Ranger debacle was that it wasn't Depp's fault. I could see him benefiting from the upside without suffering from the downside. I personally think his hammy performance is wearing thin, but he's been in different movies even as he's acted the same way. The contest between him and Robert Downey Jr. is pretty interesting. I think Depp is less a marquis name but better at catalyzing an ensemble or genre movie and making it memorable, while audiences largely go to see Downey for being Downey.
Kim Hollis: I think the only reason The Lone Ranger did as well as it did was *because* of the presence of Depp. Without him, it's a disaster. No one else but Depp (and sure, Robert Downey Jr.) gets a film like Sweeney Todd to open to $9 million and earn $150 million worldwide. With all that said, I do think he's starting to fade a bit. He'll always have loyal fans, but he may not continue to draw the kinds of mass audiences that he has in the past.
David Mumpower: I agree with Kim that The Lone Ranger is Jonah Hex II without Depp. Still, his presence in the cast only did for this would-be tenetpole title what Depp did for Secret Window as Edwin mentioned. He boosted the gate some but his presence paid for the sales tax on the project. Disney is footing the bill for the rest and the mark-up on The Lone Ranger is a *bitch*.
I have never lined up on Edwin with regards to Depp as the number one star in the world. We have debated this before, and our opinions are established. He credits Depp for Sparrow and believes that the other titles are fallout from that role. I am of the opinion that Tim Burton needs Johnny Depp more than the inverse. Alice in Wonderland and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory tore up the box office because of Depp, not Burton. For a time, he was undeniably the number one box office draw in the world in my estimation.
What this past week confirmed for me is what we had all suggested as a possibility in the days leading up to the release of The Avengers. Robert Downey Jr.'s career can be quantified as better at the moment (thanks for the data points, Daron). Depp is still a draw, of course, but he needs to be pushing Pirates of the Caribbean 5. And that script needs to be brilliant. Then again, the best solution would be for Depp and Downey Jr. to do a buddy movie. Cha-ching.
Kim Hollis: The comedy concert movie Kevin Hart: Let Me Explain opened to $10.1 million from Friday-to-Sunday and an awesome $17.5 million since Wednesday. Its budget was $750,000. How did this happen?
Jay Barney: If Despicable Me hadn’t opened so huge, and Lone Ranger started so poorly, this might be the story of the weekend. This really wasn’t on anybody’s radar screen and it is by far the most profitable venture of the weekend. I don’t know about the “true” cost associated with this type project, let’s double…triple….quadruple the $750,000 it took to put this together, and Lionsgate/Summit still has an enormous money producer in their laps.
If Universal has ruled the summer, it looks like Lionsgate gets an honorable mention over the long term. They have had a pretty successful run recently. Within the last 18 months they have had Hunger Games and Breaking Dawn Part 2, both massive hits. The Possession was brought to theaters for peanuts and it brought in $85 million worldwide. The same for Sinister. In 2013 they started out with Warm Bodies. That was made for $35 million and took in a respectable $116 million worldwide. Snitch made them a little money. There were early summer/late spring mis-steps with Tyler Perry’s Temptation and the Big Wedding. They have recovered nicely with their last two outings. Now You See Me is one of the surprise success stories so far, and Kevin Hart: Let Me Explain is going to be a money tree for them.
Edwin Davies: This result was largely the result of the success of Hart's last concert movie, Laugh At My Pain. That film finished with a comparatively modest $7.7 million, but it was also the biggest stand-up comedy film in almost a decade. Admittedly, that's because most stand-ups put their material on cable or online these days, so concert movies are pretty rare, but that just made that success all the more impressive. That result suggested that Hart was pretty big, especially since it never played in more than 287 theaters, and the subsequent two years have only seen his profile rise. He was in Think Like A Man, which was a sizable hit, he hosted SNL and he toured, playing gigs around the world. This movie came out at exactly the right time to capitalize on the cresting of the wave of his success, striking while his career is hot.
Lionsgate for their part responded to his increased profile brilliantly, putting the film out to more than three times as many locations, meaning more fans could see the film - especially those who might not have been able to see him live on the tour itself, which always an appeal of these films - but without overstretching it or diluting availability in regards to the demand. It's a combination of great timing with regards to Hart's career and a smart release strategy and it paid off beautifully.
Max Braden: I caught Laugh at My Pain on cable in the past few days, but I don't know if it had been running long enough to provide some advertising for the new movie, or if it had been programmed to grab viewers who had just caught Let Me Explain in theaters and were happy to watch more of Hart's material. I really had no awareness that Hart had a comedy movie in theaters, so I'd attribute the success this weekend to word-of-mouth, and the success of word of mouth based on Hart's broadly appealing comedy.
Kim Hollis: Oh, I saw trailer and ads (and they had me interested. I really believe Think Like a Man had the success it did largely *because* of Kevin Hart so his latest concert film success seems like a logical progression. I love that a comedy concert film was able to perform this well.
David Mumpower: BOP took some heat last year for attributing so much of the popularity of Think Like a Man, a highly recommended movie by the way, to Kevin Hart. I understood those arguments since it was an ensemble piece. I disagreed with the assertions because Hart was the person featured in the trailers. I fully expected Let Me Explain to open extremely well this weekend but I am still shocked by this result. Hart has leveled up to the point that he has become Steve Carell-like in his own way. Carell earned the respect of his peers long before he became a household name. Hart has accomplished the same feat and is by his own admission now following the same career path as Eddie Murphy. I am not sure he can ever be a leading man due to his minuscule stature (he's 5'2" and maybe 150 pounds) but he should be the gold standard as comedy relief for a long time to come. The grass roots nature of his ascension is also refreshing. Kevin Hart is the people's choice, and we have chosen wisely.