Monday Morning Quarterback
By BOP Staff
July 8, 2014
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Edwin Davies: This is towards the upper end of my expectations for Tammy for a number of reasons. Foremost amongst them is the fact that there was no clear gimmick driving Tammy other than "Melissa McCarthy is in this!" which is markedly different to The Heat, Bridesmaids and Identity Thief, all of which paired her with an established star, had an easily marketable premise or both. Tammy, meanwhile, is the first film that has traded solely on her name as its main draw, and the fact that it pulled in more than $30 million over five-days, despite an almost totally laugh-free trailer, horrible reviews and terrible word-of-mouth says a lot about her drawing power at the moment.
However, I don't think it'll hold up as well as other, bigger comedies like Neighbors and 22 Jump Street have this year, or any of her previous comedies for that matter, because there doesn't seem to be that much support for it as far as audiences are concerned. It might see a small profit before it leaves theaters, so it's not a disaster, but it could prove detrimental to the next film she stars in since Tammy is exactly the sort of film that could hurt a star's brand.
Jay Barney: While the subject matter may be unappealing, I think this result is actually just fine. McCarthy has almost always been paired with established stars or shared the screen, and with the $20 million budget this is going to make money in the long run. Yes, this is not the type of film or audience reception I would expect from a 4th of July weekend, but Tammy, despite the lack critical support will not cause the studio to take a hit.
I think the reaction to the relatively low opening over this holiday frame is partly because she has had so many hits in a row. It is difficult to string together as many big time successes as she has had. With Tammy opening like this, it is nothing special. The other films she was involved in were hits, this one will be forgettable. People are just noting the first "average" outing for her.
Bruce Hall: It would be easy to say that this represents the upper boundary of Melissa McCarthy's appeal, and leave it at that. It's true, there was really no identifiable hook to the trailer, and the baffling one sheets made it look like a movie about a waterskiing waitress who thinks her fingers are guns. I tend to believe that she's the kind of talent who works best with others, but Tammy probably isn't a fair test of this theory. Despite its utter lack of appeal, the reviews aren't quite Uwe Boll bad, but....oh wait. Yes they are.
But I guess that's not fair, either. Since it opened Wednesday, all Tammy has done is amply cover its production budget and - despite being almost universally hated - still earn better reviews than Marky Mark and the Giant Robot Dinosaurs. Despite earning somewhat less than many were hoping, Tammy should be considered a disappointment in the same way it is when someone buys you a Camaro instead of a Corvette. It's less than you were hoping for but it's still pretty fast, and it's now acceptable for you to grow a mullet.
I don't know whether Melissa McCarthy will become the superstar some think she is, but she'll get another chance. We can only hope someone will think to give her something worthy or her ability.
Max Braden: Seeing the trailer for this movie and the results makes me think of Adam Sandler. Like the results for Blended or Jack and Jill. I firmly believe that Melissa McCarthy is funnier than this and has the potential to open a movie as the sole lead with a significantly higher number. I do think it's unfortunate that this result will lead people to think the numbers for The Heat were all Sandra Bullock's doing and McCarthy was just along for the ride, which can lead to fewer opportunities for McCarthy to prove that thinking wrong. But I think she can do it - if she picks a project that is smarter than this movie.
Reagen Sulewski: While it's one thing to say, "Look how terrible this was and still hit! She's obviously still got it!" and that's true to some extent - comedy success is fleeting, and the real test will come with her next film. It had better be above reproach. Adam Sandler survived Little Nicky, but he didn't really survive Jack & Jill, other than through stunt casting. I would say that no more family favors be in order in the McCarthy household, which could make for some awkward dinner conversation. "Hey, remember that time you killed my career?"
David Mumpower: I agree with Reagen in that Tammy is unquestionably a moneymaker relative to investment. This project was clearly personal to Melissa McCarthy as her husband directed it. In just coming up with a goofy adventure comedy, McCarthy has outputted a cheap film that cashes in on her celebrity. That works once. Afterward, the goodwill that had been acquired over time fades into oblivion. The people who love McCarthy will still give her the benefit of the doubt next time. The ones who are on the fence about her but enjoyed The Heat and Bridesmaids are now thinking, “Yikes, if this movie is anything like Tammy…” St. Vincent may not pay the price for the inferior quality of Tammy, but Spy will need great trailers to counterbalance the lingering memories of the McCarthy family’s failed comedy.
Kim Hollis: I think it’s a fine opening, one we’d never have believed possible this time a year ago. And yet, there’s some veneer of disappointment around it, probably because I really do hope for more from McCarthy. It’s one thing to be able to blame a bad script or a bad director for a movie, but when it’s your movie and your husband directing, it’s a lot harder to half-heartedly praise her. I’d really like to see her stop playing the sloppy, sort of annoying fat lady and move on to other types of roles. We know she has it in her, because we saw it during her run on Gilmore Girls.
Kim Hollis: Earth to Echo debuted with $8.4 million from Friday-to-Sunday and $13.6 million in five days. What do you think about this E.T. clone's numbers?
Edwin Davies: As was the case with Tammy, this is better than I was expecting Earth to Echo to do if only because my expectations were so low. Live-action family films aren't big business anymore, and the combination of that genre with a found footage aesthetic - which is a style that tends to be associated with horror films - always seemed like an odd fit to me. For a film that looks so weird and misjudged, and one that cost relatively little to make, this seems like a best case scenario.
Jay Barney: This is not a great opening. I don't think expectations were ever too high, but any interest Earth to Echo wanted to develop as a family film against an adult comedy, a horror film, and Transformers really didn't materialize. Perhaps it will, maybe it will become the choice in a slate of movies that is pretty weak over the next few days, but this opening is unremarkable. It opened sixth on over 3,000 screens. Nope. Not a good showing.
Bruce Hall: I'm not sure who I should feel sorry for here. Disney originally produced and shot this movie, before deciding to sell the rights to anyone who wanted a shameless knockoff of E.T. where the alien looks like a radioactive Furbee skeleton. Relativity was so proud to own it that they pushed the release out from January to this past weekend, which doesn't make a lot of sense on the surface. However, as Edwin pointed out, the film's premise was hard to market; it's a red-headed stepchild nobody knew what to do with. Maybe someone just wanted to release it on the down-low and hope for the best. Maybe they'll luck out. With that $13 million opening going against a reported $20 million budget, there's a possibility this could turn out all right for someone.
Reagen Sulewski: I have to admit, this seemed like a decent idea to me when I first saw the basic idea of it as [found footage] + [beloved hit] should be something that works. Of course, it all comes down to execution, and Dave Green, if that is indeed the director's real name, is certainly no Steven Spielberg. I think the writing was on the wall when they decided to just advertise it to the pre-teen audience, which is one of the more limiting demos you can have if you don't get their families. Basically, they took a gamble and lost, and then decided to cut bait.
Kim Hollis: This is a lot better than I imagined this movie would do, primarily because of the reason Reagen mentioned above – they really only marketed it to that extremely limited pre-teen demographic. I frankly have no idea how this made as much money as it did. I don’t think it’s a disastrous result for the studio, but I do imagine they’re going to have to hope for profitability on home video rather than domestic/international release.