Monday Morning Quarterback Part I
By BOP Staff
February 9, 2016
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Edwin Davies: It's not great considering the levels of star wattage on display, or the reputation of the Coen Brothers. On the other hand, the film was always going to have a limited appeal since films about moviemaking, let alone period films about moviemaking, tend not to be big draws, the Coens' comedies tend to be an acquired taste and historically haven't been among their better performers, and the studio put it out on one of the worst weekends for releasing a movie because all entertainment gets clobbered by the Super Bowl. It could have been worse, is what I'm saying.
Also worth noting is that the film was made for a very modest $22 million, a total that it should reach domestically before it's done, and the Coens' films consistently perform better overseas than they do in the US (case in point: True Grit is the only one of their films released in the past decade to gross more domestically than internationally) so this one should end up being a respectable win for Universal.
Felix Quinonez: I'd say that when you consider what type of movie it is and its release date, the opening seems just fine. It's obviously no breakout but is right in line with expectations. Also it has a fairly low budget that the movie should be able to match just with its domestic gross. If there is a cause for concern, it's the weak C- cinema score. It seems destined for a big drop and quick flameout at the theaters.
Ryan Kyle: $11.4 million is a fine opening for this film which Universal's stellar marketing team disguised as a star-studded light comedy when in reality it is a subversive period story set during the studio-system era of Hollywood with the big name stars (Tatum, ScarJo, Jonah Hill) limited to a few scenes apiece. Audiences obviously didn't like the trick, as they rewarded Hail, Caesar! with a miserable C- Cinemascore. For those not versed in Cinemascore, The Boy (B-), The Forest (C), Dirty Grandpa (B) and even Fifty Shades of Black (B) all got better marks, even though critics felt differently as Caesar has a Rotten Tomatoes score higher than all of those aforementioned films combined AND doubled. But critics aren't the ones paying for tickets. A quick flameout should be in order, especially with Zoolander 2 on the horizon for those looking for a star-studded laugher. However, the second weekend crash should be lessened by a stronger Sunday gross due to this week's weakened Sunday from the Super Bowl.
Ben Gruchow: It's on the low end of expectations for this one, which initially started out closer to the mid-teens (about $14 million) before trending down to around $12 right before the weekend began. The C-minus CinemaScore on Friday, which was far lower than the film deserves qualitatively, probably hurt it as far as multiplier, but only by a little bit. I don't think there's much of a chance at a rebound unless Zoolander 2 is a washout; it's not like this is a little movie that came up and surprised anyone with either its critical reviews or its audience reviews. I thought it was a very good film, but you have to be willing to play by its rules and on its wavelength a little. That's not exactly part of the recipe for a huge crowd-pleaser. The release date is less of a factor in terms of reputation or buzz; this is the frame that gave us a $22 million opening for Monuments Men in 2014, $34 million for Identity Thief in 2013, $30 million for Dear John in 2010, etc. And Fargo was first released in early March way back in 1996, albeit in a limited run. The numbers for Hail, Caesar! are down to the tone of this particular film, unjustified though those numbers may be.
Michael Lynderey: I was thinking back to Burn After Reading, which also starred Clooney and Swinton among a host of other big names, and opened well higher, at $19 million. That movie was somewhat marketed on its cast, and I thought the same was true here (with Channing Tatum standing in for Brad Pitt). They're both about as well reviewed. So I don't really know what made the difference here so much so that the film opened on the other end of the teen spectrum. Is it the old mantra that movies about Hollywood don't do very well? Has Trumbo exhausted the national appetite for stories about Hollywood screenwriters in the 1950s? (As I recall, Trumbo was a massive box office hit). Regardless of the exact reason, it's clear that Coen Brothers box office, much like their movies, is totally unpredictable.
David Mumpower: True Grit changed people's opinions of the box office capabilities of the Coen Brothers. Looking at their overall body of work, however, this performance is, if anything, good for them. In fact, Bridge of Spies has the added benefits of Steven Spielberg's name, Tom Hanks' drawing power, and a Best Picture nomination as selling points. It started with $15.4 million during opening weekend on the way to current box office of $72 million. Hail, Caesar! is a much more subversive release, and insider Hollywood films almost always underachieve at the box office. So, I consider this result middling to positive, all things considered.
Kim Hollis: The Choice, a Nicholas Sparks joint, earned $6 million this weekend. What do you think of this box office performance?
Edwin Davies: The Nicholas Sparks brand has been in decline for quite a while now, and when you place this - the lowest opening for a Sparks adaptation - against 2014's The Best of Me and last year's The Longest Ride, it becomes clear that the audience that made every other film based on his work a hit has more or less drifted away at this point. I don't know if this is because filmmakers have run out of popular Sparks novels to adapt or if previous success was predicated on having medium name stars attached, but it definitely seems that the brand's appeal has dried up, and the mere fact that a film is based off a Sparks novel is no longer enough to get people interested.
Felix Quinonez: I think the brand's slide is no longer something they can ignore. The audience has either moved on or caught on to the fact that these movies aren't that good. It's time that they seriously revamp these movies somehow or call it a night.
Ryan Kyle: $6 million is a very poor opening for a Nicholas Sparks brand film. It resembles the trajectory of prolific author Stephen King, who had a barrage of novels adapted into films to mild success in the '80s, but by the time the early '90s rolled around, returns started to noticeably diminish. While Sparks' latest films have not reached the $20 million highs of previous ones, they have at least opened in the low teens like his first few flicks. These films have never played well overseas as DVD and TV licensing have always been the real money here. I don't think Sparks has anything to worry about yet as he has a wealth of other novels to turn into films and this is the first outright bomb, but I think Hollywood should take a break from the annual Sparks releases to let the brand breathe for a minute (and maybe cast a recognizable name or two the next go-around).
Michael Lynderey: There are no other Sparks adaptations filming or getting ready to, so it does seem like the brand name is taking a break for a little while. The Choice has been barbecued by Rotten Tomatoes, but it really isn't much worse than most of the recent Sparks films: as usual, the first hour, the romance, is pretty agreeable. And then, as always, the characters are struck by a random act of violence that kind of comes of left field, which is probably what most critics are directing their animus at. Stephen King movies, by the way, were always a lot more hit and miss, while the Sparks group has followed a more conventional pattern of two early modest successes (Message in a Bottle and A Walk to Remember), followed by a mega-hit that still defines the brand (The Notebook), then a couple of box office hits that weren't all that well reviewed (Dear John, The Last Song), and now finally the tail end, with a bunch of films that didn't do well financially nor critically. Whether this cycle can be reversed is a tough call. Like I said, it may take a few years.
David Mumpower: Anything that diminishes the Nicholas Sparks brand enough to jeopardize its future is aces by me. While I know that other Sparks projects are in the offing, he's lucky to have the career he does. The average Hallmark movie demonstrates more wit and romance than every film of his that isn't named The Notebook. Also, he is already riffing on his own ideas with stories such as The Longest Ride, which mimics The Notebook in structure and theme. So, I'm glad this film failed and I'm actively rooting against future Sparks projects, something I rarely say about movies.