Monday Morning Quarterback
By BOP Staff
December 18, 2007
BoxOfficeProphets.com

In hindsight, Blank should have pulled out a gun and shot him in the mouth.

As Barney Stinson would say, "It's legendary."

Kim Hollis: I Am Legend shattered the December record for opening weekend with an estimated $77.2 million. Heap the appropriate amount of praise upon its performance. To what do you attribute its glowing success?

Max Braden: Wow. I'd expected not much over half of what it raked in. Critics weren't overwhelmingly praising the movie, so I'd say the trailer is what paid off - Will Smith back in a big budget action piece after three years, and enough mystery to make people want to find out what happens to him. I guess audiences were hungry for it.

Pete Kilmer: Higher than what I thought it was going to make, which I thought around $50 million. The reason for it? Big Willie is Mr. Box Office. Put him in a blockbuster popcorn movie and watch it roll in. Plus the fact that he truly has grown as an actor (he was damn good in the film) only enhances what this guy is capable of box office wise. I was in a packed IMAX theater and no joke...people were crying during two scenes and on the edge of their seat the whole time. This movie is far from perfect...some spotty CGI almost ruined it for me, and the movie just collapses in the last three minutes. But that's a minor quibble from me. I really enjoyed this film. Oh and word-of-mouth leaving the theater..."best film of the year'...from a 62-year-old white guy.

David Mumpower: I strongly suspect that the mercurial "box office vacuum" we have referenced in past discussions came into play with both new releases this weekend. I had said last week that I expected I Am Legend to open in the $60-$70 million range, so $77.2 million is a number beyond even my lofty aspirations. What helps I Am Legend is a four month slate of releases so lackluster in quality that the industry appears almost hell-bent on alienating its core audience. There were simply no mainstream productions that would qualify as tentpoles. This built up more and more demand as consumers waited longer and longer to have an excuse to go see a movie. I Am Legend finally provided a good option. It also helps that this title is an IMAX release. After Beowulf and now this, we are beginning to more fully appreciate the impact the increased ticket prices can have upon a title's overall box office. The average ticket price in 2007 has been forecasted as $6.70-$6.78, but I am starting to believe that's low. IMAX sales universally go for $12-$16 a piece. That's a huge impact per sale.

Kim Hollis: I had been thinking $60-65 million for this film but it still blew even that expectation out of the water. Other people are right. With very little else to entice adult audiences in recent months, I Am Legend was a monolith with all kinds of breakout potential.

Reagen Sulewski: This is a pretty outstanding showing. I guess there is just no beating the last-man-on-Earth scenario to bring in a crowd, and when you cross that with someone with the proven blockbuster status of Will Smith, you can start writing checks.

Fresh Princes is on top of the world

Kim Hollis: I Am Legend marks Will Smith's fifth(!) opening of $50 million plus. Is he the most bankable movie star working today?

Shane Jenkins: Almost indisputably. He's got the magic combination of pure movie star charisma and the ability to pick projects people actually want to see.

Max Braden: He's the most versatile and still in prime condition to be able to pull off the huge numbers. Tom Hanks is still a strong draw but doesn't have the tough guy quality to do action movies (though hey, if Harrison Ford is still at it...). Tom Cruise could probably continue to open that big with projects like War of the Worlds and Mission: Impossible, but his choice of less marketable material and frankly his off-screen weirdness have hurt him. Hugh Jackman has had four big openings with Van Helsing and the three X-Men projects and has Wolverine coming up. I see him as the closest in bankability to Smith, though his success has been helped a lot by the franchise, just as the stars of The Matrix, Spider-Man, Harry Potter, and Pirates of the Caribbean were. Depending on the projects they choose, Matt Damon and Shia LaBeouf could possibly match Smith in the future. Since we're on the subject, it's worth noting that Stallone has been in the franchise business as long as Ford has and managed to keep the Rocky series alive without a Spielberg to help him. It'll be interesting to see what happens with Rambo next year.

Tim Briody: His hits have been huge, his misses haven't hurt him all that much (though I'm sure he'd rather not talk about 1999 and 2000) and he's hit it big in comedies, dramas and action. Somewhere, DJ Jazzy Jeff is crying.

Pete Kilmer: Tim...Will Smith with reunite with DJ Jazzy Jeff next year for a new CD and a series of shows. He ain't crying. Will Smith is on a whole other level now. He's on that level that Arnie was for a bit as was Harrison and Tom Cruise, what's different about Will is that he doesn't stick to one genre. Sure some of his biggest hits are science fiction movies (ID4, Men In Black, Legend), but he's also had major success with comedy and drama and pulled them off without it seeming like it was calculated move (Twins anyone?). Plus he doesn't forget where he came from and his fans love him for it.

David Mumpower: To my mind, The Pursuit of Happyness, a $162.6 million earner, better exemplifies Smith's drawing power than the shamelessly commercial I Am Legend does. If he can have that sort of success with a drama about a homeless father, he can stake a claim to being able to sell almost anything. Whenever we have these discussions about the biggest box office draws in Hollywood, the short list includes Johnny Depp, Will Smith and Adam Sandler. At this point, I think that any unbiased observer must acknowledge Smith is The Guy in the industry although Depp gets a chance to stake his claim if he can turn the relatively unmarketable Sweeney Todd into a $100 million earner.

Kim Hollis: Will Smith totally has the golden touch. Audiences know that they can usually trust his films to be entertaining, and they give him their votes of confidence with dollar bills.

Joel Corcoran: I'd put him at the top for now, but I'm hesitant to say he's the "most" bankable star. I think Matt Damon is right up there, too, after the successes of The Departed and the entire Bourne franchise, and Reese Witherspoon can't be underestimated.

Kim Hollis: Reese just had a big bomb a couple of months ago, and she's not even in Smith's neighborhood. Damon is getting there, maybe.

National Whosawhat now?

Kim Hollis: We had a survey last week asking which would be bigger between I Am Legend and National Treasure: Book of Secrets. Most of us said Book of Secrets. Would you like to change your answer?

Max Braden: I picked I Am Legend to open bigger but Book of Secrets to finish bigger. Unless National Treasure opens bigger than I've been thinking, I'm now... no wait ... but ... hey, they're both winners in my book.

Pete Kilmer: National Treasure 2 is the only other movie right now that can pull me away from playing Mass Effect on the Xbox.

David Mumpower: Like Max, I said that I believed I Am Legend would win the battle, but National Treasure: Book of Secrets would win the war. At this point, I'm pretty sure I'm wrong. I Am Legend looks like a $200 million earner. I don't see the National Treasure sequel making that type of box office domestically.

Kim Hollis: I didn't choose last week, so I can't give a real answer. However, I hate National Treasure and was always rooting for I Am Legend to win. Just wanted to get that out there.

Reagen Sulewski: I'll be interested to see if Legend can keep this up. I think National Treasure 2 could potentially catch up by its third weekend.

Joel Corcoran: I'm playing The Grinch here. Given the performance of Alvin and the Chipmunks, I simply will not underestimate the general public's adoration for running to the theater to see utterly crappy movies that just happen to be well-packaged and marketed to the hilt. I'm really glad to see I am Legend do so well because it is a genuinely great movie in virtually all aspects. But I'm cynically going to say that National Treasure: Book of Secrets will beat it in the end.

Return of the Fresh Prince

Kim Hollis: Which impresses you more, The Lord of the Ring: Return of the King's opening of $72.6 million from 3,703 venues in 2003 or I Am Legend's $76.5 million from 3,606 venues in 2007?

Max Braden: Return of the King's numbers were almost a given because it was the third in a very successful series. You could look at The Fellowship of the Ring, which earned $74 million over its first five days in December of 2001. The Tolkien series was a known property but a risky genre to pull off, and Smith is a known star with an uncertain story. I think both exceeded expectations. The real mind blower is Alvin and the Chipmunks...

Pete Kilmer: Smith vs. Zombies. That's all they needed to pitch the studio I'm sure. With LOTR 3 you had the third in a very engrossing and emotional film series (Hey, George Lucas...remember when you used to make those?) and with Legend...you had Smith vs. Zombies. I guess I'm surprised by how high Legend grossed this weekend.

David Mumpower: This is a much more complicated question than it might seem on the surface. Return of the King has a number that inflation-adjusts to $80.7 million, which beats I Am Legend straight up. It also did not get ticket sales skew of IMAX the way that the Will Smith title has. Where it has a huge advantage is in being the final movie of a franchise that had two previous $300+ million earners. So, the debate lies in whether it is more impressive to sell more tickets or leverage an unknown property into record setting opening weekend revenues. I am inclined to believe the latter. The success of Return of the King was always just a matter of degrees. I Am Legend's performance could have gone a lot of different ways. It's broken the record and it deserves all the glory for that.

Kim Hollis: Given that the first two films in the Lord of the Rings series were juggernauts in their own right, I think the edge has to go to I Am Legend here. Yes, the IMAX has some effect, but still.

Reagen Sulewski: I think Legend is more impressive. King was already a known quantity by that point. There was the three hour length of that to deal with but it had much better reviews and a broader target audience that wouldn't be freaked out by the premise.

Joel Corcoran: Even though I'm a model Lord of the Rings fan-boy, I also have to give the edge to I am Legend. I agree that Return of the King was part of a known franchise, but you also have to look at the fan base. The Lord of the Rings franchise was a risky venture only because there was a high risk of alienating an extensive and incredibly devoted group of fans that had accumulated over decades. I am Legend is based on a single science fiction pulp novel that many people have enjoyed reading, but most people have never heard of. By the time Return of the King came out, not only were the fans utterly raving with joy over how good the adaption was, the whole Lord of the Rings mystique had become part of the pop culture zeitgeist (witness Gollum appearing at the MTV Movie Awards). However, I am Legend had to start with virtually no fan base at all, no vibrations in the pop culture, no popularity at all, really. The fact that Will-Smith-in-a-zombie-movie beat out a mythology with broader and deeper appeal than Star Wars is pretty amazing.

Someone has more than enough money for a hula hoopPeople, the chipmunk eats poop. What are you thinking?

Kim Hollis: So, uh, we've been making fun of Alvin and the Chipmunks ever since the first trailer was released. Were we wrong then, or did the marketing improve that much in the past six months?

Max Braden: What marketing? Were there TV ads I missed? Were there product tie ins? I'm see I'm going to have to get a mail order baby if I'm going to predict these things more accurately.

Tim Briody: Yeah, I had a vague idea this was coming out this month, and thought it would be pretty harmless and disappear fairly quickly. Um, oops.

David Mumpower: If being wrong about the success of Alvin and the Chipmunks is wrong, I don't wait to be right. If I want to watch chipmunks eating poop, I'll go to the park. They do it for free there, and it doesn't make me sad for Jason Lee.

Kim Hollis: Truly it is the end of days.

Joel Corcoran: The marketing seemed alright to me\- a fairly standard movie marketing campaign. Nothing exceptional, so I am completely and utterly befuddled about why this movie did so well at the box office. I guess Jason Lee and David Cross are a lot more popular than we anticipated. Either that, or it's 1958 all over again ... which I wouldn't really mind that much.

Jim Van Nest: Y'all must not be watching the right channels. I have 2 boys, 8 and 9 years old, and the channels they watch (Nick, Cartoon Network, Discovery Kids, etc) played Alvin commercials during every single commercial break. I could quote the fricking TV ad, I heard it so much. While I would never have expected that kind of coin, kids were beaten to death with the ads and every single kid I know (and I run a Cub Scout pack, so there's plenty)...they all couldn't wait for Alvin to hit theaters.

Oh, that's a body blow

Kim Hollis: The Golden Compass absorbed another significant setback this week, falling 65% to $9 million. This is your opportunity to console a New Line exec. How would you like to do it?

Shane Jenkins: "Um, those boxes you're using to pack up all your office stuff sure look sturdy! Where ever did you get them?"

My prediction from last week that this would inch over the $100 million mark now looks foolhardy, and I don't think everyone is going to emerge from this with their jobs intact. And I suppose Golden Compass joins Eragon in the cliffhanger-that-will-never-be-resolved sub-genre. At least I can always *imagine* Malkovich riding that evil dragon...

Max Braden: "It could have been worse, you could have been working over at Fox Anim-- Alvin and the Chipmunks made what??! Well, maybe they're hiring."

David Mumpower: "At least you got paid this week, unlike all of those striking writers you hate." If we're keeping score at home, The Golden Compass absorbed its first body blow with opening weekend, its second one with weekday numbers and its final one with a 66% drop from an already lousy debut. This is a wipeout, plain and simple. There is a lesson with this and Stardust. If you are going to spend big money for a fairy tale movie, you damn sure better make certain it does in fact appeal to children. It's hard for me to believe people throwing around this much money could miss something so obvious. I'm told The Golden Compass is a kids' movie, but I'm fuzzy on the why of it.

Kim Hollis: "Will Ferrell is coming in February to smite your enemies. We'll just ignore the rest of your 2008 schedule."

Joel Corcoran: "Atheism is gonna be huge in 2009, so just think about the sequel!"

Reagen Sulewski: "At least you didn't make Battlefield:Earth."

They've got the majority of the Alaska vote

Kim Hollis: Exhibitors showing blockbusters weren't the only ones smiling this weekend. Indie theaters had plenty of good news as well, as Atonement earned $1.85 from 117 venues and Juno pulled in $1.44 million from 40 venues. These are per exhibition averages of $15,835 and $36,018 respectively. Each is scintillating. Which is more impressive to you and why?

Max Braden: I guess Atonement could have gone the way of Love in the Time of Cholera numbers but to me Juno is the more impressive. December is prime Anglophile territory, while Juno has a rookie writer, sophomore director and fairly new cast. Also noteworthy: Across the Universe is the leading limited release of the year so with over $24 million after three months in theaters.

David Mumpower: I agree with Max that while Atonement's numbers are quite impressive, Juno is that much higher on the list of accomplishments. We're talking about a 127% bump over another performance we see as incredible. Juno is showing all of the signs of being a breakout indie hit.

Reagen Sulewski: Yeah, Juno has easily proven it's a potential Little Miss Sunshine. Atonement made its campaign for Oscars firm though, so that's a good thing.

Joel Corcoran: Definitely Juno. Not only for the reasons already mentioned (which I agree with), but also the background. It's a fair comparison to place Atonement alongside Love in the Time of Cholera. Atonement was critically aclaimed when it was published a few years ago, won the National Book Critics Award, and was even short-listed for the Booker prize. It's just the sort of thing that art house denizens would want to see. Juno is more like Little Miss Sunshine. Quirky and experimental, but lacking a literary base to start from.

I'm especially happy with this result 'cause it should give Ellen Page some more exposure and more work.