New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Matthew Huntley: Josh, I know they're heavily despised, but I also enjoyed Anaconda and The Cell, so I would contend that J-Lo has made more than one good movie.

To answer Kim's question: no, I don't think J-Lo's career as a lead actress is necessarily over. CBS Films may actually be satisfied with Back-Up Plans's opening numbers (realistically, it couldn't have cost that much to make). Lopez will continue to get top billing, but she needs another A-list star's name next to hers if the movie is going to open above $12 million.

Tom Macy: It certainly hurts her resume, but as you guys said, this movie's take is no embarrassment just a little underwhelming. I think there are growing trends, like the aforementioned ensemble comedies that will help J-Lo hang around for a little while leaving the door open for more headlining roles. That is contingent of course on her willingness to share the spotlight. But as of now she looks pretty dead in the water as a lead actress. The only projects she has on the docket are in development and this is her first film since 2006, which surprises me. So people clearly weren't going into J-Lo withdrawl. She's going to have to choose her next steps very carefully.

Jason Lee: J-Lo is too big of a name (yes, even in this day and age) to be truly dead as a viable lead actress. Hearkening back to my answer to the previous question, I think this is a question of chemistry. She needs a co-star (or a supporting cast) that will make people excited to see her on the screen. Lopez vs. Jane Fonda? That was an exciting prospect. Pair her with a romantic or comedic foil and I could see her being successful.

Reagen Sulewski: Yeah, once you reach a certain level of fame, you're never truly out of the running as a lead unless you do something horrible in the public (and even that's not a deal-breaker - see: Mel Gibson). Someday, someone might even find the right project for her that could be a hit. But she's got way too much negative baggage to have just anything be a hit for her.

David Mumpower: One of the aspects of box office performance that gets drowned out too much is how much of an eternity half a dozen years is. That takes a 10-year-old up to 16, meaning they go from children’s films from bad horror. A 16-year-old is now 22, meaning they’re far more focused on movies that are the start of a fun night out instead of an escape from the ‘rents. Jennifer Lopez’s absence from movies is important in this regard because she’s had almost that much of a gap between major releases. And we have to pre-date Gigli, going all the way back to The Wedding Planner and Maid in Manhattan to find that period where she was where Katherine Heigl is right now. It’s just too long an absence for her to overcome with her first major release in ages.

Monster-In-Law was an $82.9 million winner in 2005, Shall We Dance? was solid with $57.9 million, The Wedding Planner did $60.4 million, and Maid in Manhattan is her biggest hit to date at $93.9 million. Josh is right that her overall body of work is predicated upon the impeccable quality of Out of Sight, but she was a factor at one point. Has that gone away for good? I’m not one to be finite in an industry obsessed with comebacks. I have trouble finding a scenario where she becames a box office draw ever again, though. To my mind, the void she once filled no longer exists. It’s the brutal reality of the industry that younger is better. What happened with Sandra Bullock last year is unique for a reason.

Continued:       1       2       3