Monday Morning Quarterback Part II
By BOP Staff
August 5, 2008
Costner probably shouldn't run for president anytime soon, either.
Kim Hollis: Swing Vote opened to only $6.2 million for Disney. Say something funny and potentially politically incorrect about Swing Vote.
Tim Briody: Swing Vote voted for Ron Paul?
David Mumpower: The Butterfly Ballot caused a full $32,000 of them to watch Midnight Meat Train accidentally instead. Disney basically abandoned this project, which is a strange decision given the current passion for the electoral process. This was the one time a political comedy could have appealed to the primary movie-going demographics yet they quit on it anyway. Very odd.
Reagen Sulewski: Political movies = Iraq movies. People just don't want to pay $10 to be reminded of what they already saw on the news.
Tim Briody: Reagen, that's what I said in the Saturday update. Movies are escapist entertainment. Most of us would rather get this election over with already, people aren't going to want to see a movie about an election.
Les Winan: Perhaps if Kevin Costner had lapsed in and out of accent throughout the movie and then exposed his gills at the end?
Jamie Ruccio: Reagen is right. Who wants to see a movie based on something like this? Diebolt counted Swing Votes grosses.
Brandon Scott: Audiences failed to show up at the Box Office polls for this one. Or audiences in essence cast their vote by not showing up. If you really look at the cast and subject matter, it is amazing this even received a theatrical release. This swing was more of a check bunt fielded by the catcher. Quick and easy out.
Pete Kilmer: Costner really needs to stick to making westerns and sports movies.
Scott Lumley: Okay, there's a mighty big problem with this film. The premise is that the ENTIRE election of the united states is hung on the vote of one man. The problem here is that people that actually like to see movies about these sort of political shenanigans tend to know how the process works. (See Recount and the West Wing for stellar examples.) So when you pose a political satire with this as your (completely ridiculous) premise, the already small demographic that might come and see this movie is mostly dissuaded from it. Also, Kevin Costner has all the box office appeal of a bran muffin at this point. For crying out loud Kevin, go make another funny sports film, like Pete said. You have a niche and a fan base! Try using it!
Will Ferrell burying John C. Reilly=$$$$$
Kim Hollis: Step Brothers fell 47% to $16.5 million. With a running total of just over $63 million, do you think Step Brothers is a success story for Sony?
David Mumpower: Step Brothers has already passed some other recent Will Ferrell films such as Semi-Pro (which it has doubled), Bewitched, Kicking and Screaming and Stranger Than Fiction. It's not going to beat Blades of Glory by any stretch; however, it probably surpasses the domestic performances of Old School and Anchorman as well. There seems to be a clear line of demarcation between "good" Will Ferrell movies and, well, stuff like The Producers. North America has decided Step Brothers is the former, which makes me sad.
Scott Lumley: It depends how you judge success. If your total benchmark for success is profit, then yes, this is a success. If you're aiming for something a little higher, like say a unique and non-formulaic attempt to cash in on Will Ferrell's comedic genius, then this is a big steaming pile of file. I imagine they're still using benchmark 'A' however.
Brandon Scott: It's a money maker and a funny, if ridiculous, movie. Not a runaway success but a financial winner nevertheless, and there is never anything wrong with that. We are in a recession, right?
Tim Briody: Step Brothers has made everyone forget about Semi-Pro (and Walk Hard to a lesser extent).
Reagen Sulewski: To be fair, Walk Hard made everyone forget about Walk Hard.
Continued:
1
2
3
|
|
|
|
Print this column
