Monday Morning Quarterback Part II
By BOP Staff
October 16, 2013
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Matthew Huntley: I think the obvious answer is no one was really asking for a sequel to Machete, which opened well enough back in 2010 but displayed absolutely no legs, which coincides with its cult (vs. mainstream) following. I think Robert Rodriguez's shtick for making these types of low-budget movies is wearing thin and he needs to reinvent himself, and clearly I'm not the only one. Oddly enough, I think the release date was good (September and October are prime for movies of this nature), but the problem seems to be the movie itself, which just didn't generate enough interest. I've yet to see it, but it's not at the top of my list.
Edwin Davies: This definitely feels like a case of a director wanting to make a film that an audience just wasn't asking for. The first Machete did okay considering it was an expansion of a fake trailer from another movie that didn't do very well in the first place, but it was little more than a joke that a very small audience would appreciate. A sequel seemed like a step too far to me, and the stunt casting of pariahs like Charlie Sheen and Mel Gibson (the latter of whom was all but excluded from the advertising I saw, funnily enough) probably seemed a little desperate. I don't think the film offered anything the people were really looking for, and the whole thing felt like a straight-to-DVD film that wound up in theaters due to some clerical error.
Bruce Hall: This is a joke that only works once. Or at least, once as a fake trailer in a movie, and once as a movie based on that a fake trailer. Machete made $26 million domestically on curiosity alone. That's impressive for what it was, but I'm not sure many people outside the Rodriguez household were expecting lightning (or really more of a strong carpet shock) to strike twice in the same place.
Felix Quinonez: I think this is just a movie that nobody was asking for. The grindhouse joke is old and was never that popular to begin with. As it's already been mentioned the movie this "franchise" came out of (Grindhouse) was itself kind of a flop so clearly Robert Rodriguez needs to move on. I mean look at his Grindhouse partner. Since Grindhouse, Quentin Tarantino has made two Academy Award winning movies that also happened to be his biggest grossing movies. On the other hand, Rodriguez is still trolling in the grindhouse playground. And besides that, he made a desperate attempt to revive a kids franchise that was clearly past its sell by date (Spy Kids) and he also made Shorts, which I honestly know nothing about. What happened to the director that showed so much promise early in his career?
Kim Hollis: It looked pretty schlocky, which I guess was the point, but there was a very small audience for that sort of thing in the first place. It’s not like the first Machete is remembered as some masterpiece of theater, grindhouse or otherwise. Throw Charlie Sheen and Mel Gibson into a marketing campaign that reeked of desperation, and you had all of the ingredients for a collective shrug from potential movie-goers.
Max Braden: I think the release date wasn't wise. This is a summer movie that appeals to high school and college kids who have the time to see it then in theaters, or grab it on DVD during school season. I'm not surprised at the weak box office, but I expect it to do much better as a rental.
Kim Hollis: Now that Gravity has had a historic second weekend hold in addition to its outstanding opening weekend, what do you think is in the cards for its performance, both short-term and long-term? Also, what do you think about its awards potential now?
Matthew Huntley: I think it has the potential to hold onto the number spot for one more weekend and continue to experience small declines thereafter, even when faced by upcoming juggernauts Bad Grandpa, Ender's Game, Free Birds and Thor 2, all of which are teen and family-driven. As far as its awards potential, I think it will be showered with technical ones, which it absolutely deserves, but only be nominated for the more "prestigious" ones (Best Picture, Director, etc.). Essentially, it could walk away from the Oscars the same way Avatar did.
Edwin Davies: Commercially, things look very, very good for the film going forward. It'll probably win next week unless Carrie really surprises, then hold well because it's a spectacle that has to be seen in 3D and IMAX where possible. This second weekend suggests to me that it will make at least $250 million domestically, possibly $300 million. That might be a stretch, but considering that a mere two weeks ago people seemed to think it would struggle to make $100 million only serves to illustrate just how insane the film's performance has been so far, and I think it will continue to do incredibly well over the next month.
In terms of awards, I think it will get a slew of nominations - Picture, Director, Actress, either Actor or Supporting Actor depending on how you classify Clooney's role, and all the technical awards seem to be in play. Whether it wins any of them is another matter, and it seems that it will be pitted against 12 Years a Slave in a virtual recreation of the Avatar/Hurt Locker battle from a few years ago.
Felix Quinonez: I think short term, Gravity has a very good chance at repeating a third weekend on top and it even has a slight chance at repeating a fourth weekend as the number one movie. Long term, I think it has a solid chance of reaching $250 million and an outside chance of getting to $300 million domestically. And the fact it even has an outside chance of doing that is pretty amazing. As far as Oscar chances, I believe it's too early to tell. Any attempt to predict right now would just be a guess since I have nothing to base it on. It'll be easier to gauge its Oscar chances once the race is really going.
Bruce Hall: I think all the signs point to this one having legs. Superlative word-of-mouth, plus lots of press coverage translated into a very strong second week. I'll call it topping out at around $260 million stateside, just to be different. What might be more interesting is what happens at statue time. Not a lot of faces appear on screen in this movie, so when the buzz wears off will people still find the performances strong enough to merit recognition, or will Gravity find itself confined to the technical achievement awards?
Kim Hollis: Gravity should have little problem repeating at #1 this weekend (barring some sort of big surprise from the Carrie remake) and since it’s attracting an older audience, should hang around with minimal declines in box office for a couple of weeks to come. With regards to awards, it’s the leader in the clubhouse right now for most major as well as the technical awards. There will be inevitable backlash against it (there already has been some, I guess), but until other films like 12 Years a Slave actually prove themselves, Gravity is the frontrunner.
Max Braden: This is the first movie in a while where I've heard people saying they wanted to go see it in the theater a second time. I expect it's going to have rolling repeat crowds as well as continuously pulling in new audiences for the next couple weeks. I could see it sitting at #1 through the end of the month and only being toppled by Ender's Game. I could see a $275 million final tally.
Reagen Sulewski: I'd compare it to the phenomenon that happened with Avatar, albeit at a much smaller scale. It's really one of the few "gotta see it on the big screen" films - the last since arguably Life of Pi and maybe all the way back to Avatar. That word is getting out, and the fact that its fairly rapturous word-of-mouth makes it one of those cultural items that people feel like they need to have an opinion on. It's easy to say that this is the kind of thing that exhibitors need to stay relevant, but it really is that simple in some sense.