Open Forum Friday: Do A-List Actors Guarantee Box Office Success Anymore?
It’s pretty commonly held belief that Hollywood has been in a bit of a rut over the past few years, at least in terms of originality. At the moment, very few studios are looking to greenlight projects that don’t have instant name recognition. Potential franchises, licensed properties and brand names are all the rage, which explains why we’re getting so many remakes and sequels as of late — not to mention movies based on theme park rides, board games and anything else with a built-in audience. So what has changed in the world of movies that has caused producers to stop taking risks?
Well, one big issue is that it seems there are fewer and fewer bankable movie stars that can reliably draw audiences in anymore. Aside from someone like Will Smith, who makes about a bajillion dollars no matter what movie he’s in, there aren’t many actors who can guarantee a large opening weekend. Anne Thompson wrote in Variety last month that star power doesn’t necessarily pay off anymore, and studios are thinking twice before attaching big name actors to their projects. One example is the recent Ridley Scott movie, Body of Lies, which had a production budget of $70 million, and thus far has earned only $60 million worldwide. Without Leonardo DiCaprio and Russell Crowe’s names on the poster, the movie would have made a lot less… but it also would have cost a lot less too. What do you think? Do people still choose what movies to see based solely on the actors in them? Or are they becoming more critic savvy, reading reviews and generally being more picky about what they spend their money on? Can you think of any actors that still pack theatres by their mere presence alone? Give us your thoughts here on Open Forum Friday.
Comments (8)
I find that specific actors will make me more likely to see crappy films than it will get me to see something that looks good on its own merits. Like, there’s that terrible horror movie coming out in January and when I first saw the trailer I immediately said “NO WAY!” to the friends I was with, only Gary Oldman decided to show up near the end of it and I thought “Damnit, now I have to see it.”
I don’t know that people are necessarily becoming more critic savvy, though. I personally don’t bother reading reviews until after I’ve seen something, but then again I see a lot more movies than the average person so I’m obviously not looking to critics to help me be a more picky film goer.
Posted by Liz on November 21st, 2008I’m a numbers girl, so I had to pull together some statistic for this:
Of the 40 most successful movies of the last five years, half have been animated and/or kid-friendly and 75% have been franchises. Four of them have starred Will Smith.
Of the handful left over, we have:
Bruce Almighty: Jim Carrey hasn’t been a huge box office draw this decade, but he also seems to trying to branch out into more sophisticated works like Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Next year, he’s playing a gay con artist in I Love You Phillip Morris, which I doubt will be a commerical success, but it could get critical acclaim, if the book it’s based on is any indication. We’ll see if he can still draw a big audience with Yes Man in December …
War of the Worlds: This one had Tom Cruise, but it was released before he went off the deep end with Katie Holms and Scientology. I’m curious to see how the much-delayed Valkyrie will do when it finally comes out.
Mr. & Mrs. Smith: Sure it had Brad and Angelina, but I think the success of this one had more to do with the rumours surrounding their affair than the film itself. Can either one of them still bring in the dough without the other? Pitt has stuck to ensemble films recently (Ocean’s, Burn After Reading, Babel), and Jolie’s mostly doing smaller, artier stuff (Changeling, A Mighty Heart) and animated fare (Beowulf, Kung Fu Panda). Together they have over twenty films in development, but who knows how many of them will ever see the light of day. I wonder how Benjamin Button will do?
The only two actors I can think of who almost guarantee big box office are Ben Stiller and Adam Sandler. Both have had several $100M+ hits in the last few years.
Stiller: A Night At the Museum, Meet the Fockers, Dodgeball, Tropic Thunder …
Sandler: The Longest Yard, Chuck and Larry, Zohan, Click …
I expect Sandler’s Bedtime Stories and Stiller’s Museum sequel will continue this trend.
Posted by Ashley on November 21st, 2008Ashley….Katie is keeping Tom from going off the deep end. How that woman does it is a mystery!
Posted by Baychuk on November 21st, 2008Somehow Martin Lawrence pulls audience.
Posted by Jabberwacky on November 21st, 2008Figure that one out…
Most “A-List” actors are enough to keep me away from a movie.
Posted by paulm on November 22nd, 2008It is an interesting topic. You could actually expand the discussion to new technology and independent film. I’m an independent filmmaker and a common topic my filmmaking friends talk about is the how the “on demand”, HD, home theatre and downloadable environment has not opened the doors to a bigger audience for independent fair. We are seeing this because the days of some record deal at Sundance for an “independent” without name actors is gone, think, Little Miss Sunshine and Juno. When independent filmmakers travel to the American Film Market they quickly learn how having just a “C Level†actor in your film changes the whole discussion. Why is name recognition so important?
I think a lot of it has to do with the demands on people these days and the fact going to a movie is much more of a special thing than in the past. People on the whole just don’t “go out” to a movie unless they really believe it is worth their time and effort. Sure, I and you will take a chance on different films, but not the average audience member. Most films make their money after theatrical release so this is more evidence that if the formula isn’t just right (story, star, trailer) the public will quickly label a film a “rental” or “on demand” type property to watch on their phat HD screen used to play video games.
Any of the books and documentaries out there comparing the 70s to today talk about the fact that today’s Hollywood is a corporate town that doesn’t take risks or allow films to find an audience. The whole blockbuster mentality and opening weekend box office is a double edge sword that both defines a hit and kills other films chances to find an audience. It is amazing the films that are cult classics that never did well in theaters, Blade Runner, Big Lebowski, Donnie Darko, etc.
Like Hollywood has done in the past with Cinemascope, etc. they are working on separating the movie going experience from the home theatre experience as a way to make going out to the movies important again. Spielberg and others are at the forefront of developing 3D and surround systems that will make seeing it on the big screen important again.
Posted by rus on November 22nd, 20088 yrs ago I would have said Tom Hanks and for the most part Tom Cruise. A few yrs ago Adam Sandler. Now Will Smith. People are buying concept not actor!
chuck
Posted by entertainmenttodayandbeyond on November 23rd, 2008No. It has nothing to do with the actors. Good films sell, bad or mediocre films do not. Quality films and marketing are king. Name actor recognition helps, don’t get me wrong, and the comment about the AFM is absolutely true, but it’s not the endgame at the studio level that it once was.
The cinema has always been cyclical. During the golden age, the studio heads controlled the business. In the fifties when the system fell, the independent producers took over. In the seventies, the directors. In the eighties, the agents, and because of their rise, the actors took over in the nineties and that culture still exists today, but it is ending.
The internet helped kill the beast. With word of mouth spreading instantly and globally several weeks in advance of film’s release, bad movies are DOA. Stars can’t coast anymore. Their work must be good or they’re gone.
I think we’re heading into an era where the quality of the work will be paramount. I’m a dreamer, I know, but all the “pre-selling” and “branding” and corporate “synergy” in the world can’t turn Daredevil or Sahara into The Dark Knight. Only visionary filmmakers can do that.
Posted by roman on November 26th, 2008Leave a Reply