Monday Morning Quarterback Part I
By BOP Staff
August 4, 2008
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Kim Hollis: The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor opened to $40.5 million in 3,795 playdates. What should Universal think of this result?
Pete Kilmer: It would be a terrific opening if it debuted any other summer. Dark Knight shattered that line of thinking. And it's going to take awhile for studios to realize that the Dark Knight opening is not something they can expect. I think they should be pleased.
David Mumpower: I am not certain Universal is disappointed by this result, but they should be. This is the worst opening of the three actual Mummy movies (not counting The Scorpion King), but it's another aspect I find troubling. The Mummy sold about 8.5 million tickets during its opening weekend in 1999. The Mummy Returns sold a whopping 12 million over its first three days. The latest Mummy has only sold about 6 million tickets. Not only has it lost half of its audience over the past seven years, but even The Scorpion King sold 6.2 million tickets, more than this has managed. The Mummy franchise looks to be done, at least domestically. The good news about setting the film in China with Jet Li and Michelle Yeoh co-starring is that international grosses should save it.
Reagen Sulewski: I imagine they feel like they got away with one, considering they'd seen the dailies. This film rode the express bus to Generic Town, and if it were a TV show, would have been noted for a triple shark jump (the Cousin Oliver, cast member switch and the "special location"). It was a lazy, cynical cash grab, and they just barely made it worth it.
David Mumpower: So, you're saying they pulled a Rush Hour 3?
Reagen Sulewski: More or less. There was apparently still some residual goodwill from the other movies, because that's the only real way I can explain this.
James Ruccio: The fact that they opened this in August instead of the beginning of May tells me everything I think I need to know about what the studio thought of Mummy 3. What I don't get is that this didn't look any worse than the first two. So, either the studio lost complete confidence or they figured the trend for these movies was no longer viable. If it's the latter, I don't get it. The first two movies were great summer action flicks. This looked no different. I was right in the prime demo for the first two movies and thought the commercials for this looked fine. (Then again...I didn't go to Mummy 3 yet so maybe I'm disproving any point I'm trying to make, whatever it is). All I know is that I'm disappointed in the weekend total if it prevents them from making another.
Brandon Scott: Considering that it almost matched The Dark Knight in per venue average, it's a decent result. But considering it has a reported budget of $145 million, it will have a very tough time reaching that number domestically. This is a mixed bag overall and while Universal will put this in the spin cycle calling it a solid number, it has to be a bit of a downer for them.
Scott Lumley: They can be happy about that result, but it means squat. This didn't even take number one at the box office and they only got about 28% of their costs back, if that. This one has a long way to go before it makes any money, so $40.5 million is hardly any reason to break out the champagne.
Try not to think about what might have been
Kim Hollis: How would The Mummy's box office have been influenced down the road if it had been able to claim it was the film that knocked The Dark Knight from the top spot? Do you think it would have mattered?
Pete Kilmer: I don't think it mattered. Some movie at some point is going to do it.
David Mumpower: Beating The Dark Knight would have been a fascinating piece of box office trivia along the lines of Lost in Space being the movie that knocked Titanic out of first place. I'm not sure it would have helped the movie's box office prospects much, though. For whatever reason, people were not interested in this particular Mummy. Maybe Arnold Vosloo is a bigger draw than we thought. It's either that or people felt that if Rachel Weisz couldn't be bothered to show up, why should we. Under any circumstance, saying "We're Number One! Barely! For One Weekend!" wasn't going to help that much.
Reagen Sulewski: I think it would have been worth a little bit of extra publicity, but I'm not convinced it really would have mattered over and above just being a normal #1 film. With the "See it now! Now! NOW!" culture that movies have these days, being the top film of the weekend is more just a bonus than anything. By the next week, we've moved on to something else shiny.
Scott Lumley: It wouldn't have mattered at all. For this movie to claim, "We knocked The Dark Knight out of the top spot!" would be similar to me claiming that I have a shot with Angelina Jolie if she left Brad Pitt - highly suspicious and pretty much laughable.
Brandon Scott: If it would have done $60 million and really significantly beat The Dark Knight, then that would have been a more legitimate marketing claim. This is a movie that fans of the first two will see. Maybe Jet Li draws a few others but newcomers will be few and far between.
You know it. I know it. It's time for Dudley Do-Right II
Kim Hollis: A few weeks ago we posed the question whether Brendan Fraser is a box office draw. How does the Mummy's performance shade your opinion? Which of this or Journey to the Center of the Earth is the most surprising performer (good or bad) to you?
Tim Briody: Well, if Brendan Fraser doesn't do Mummy 3, it doesn't even get made, much less open to $40 million. Sorry, John Hannah. That said, the staying power of Journey to the Center of the Earth continues to impress me most. It's not quite going to get there, but it's getting way closer to $100 million than I think anyone thought it would.
David Mumpower: He has a chance at a pair of $100 million films this summer, which is pretty impressive. Both of them will fall somewhere in that $85-$110 million range, but I have to think that the film that earned only $21 million on opening weekend before showing old school legs is the better performer relative to scale. The Mummy is more surprising in that it was tracking in the mid-$60s but fell over $20 million shy of that range. For a $175 million production, it has done close to worst case scenario box office for an accredited sequel.
Jamie Ruccio: I think this discussion can mirror our Will Smith discussion after the opening of Hancock. I think Fraser is partially a draw but ultimately I think he picks projects that have a good chance of succeeding or at least not bombing.
Pete Kilmer: I really don't think Mummy 3 would have been made without Fraser. I hate to say it but almost everyone else in that cast is replaceable, but Fraser brings that swagger and charm to the table and people want to see it. I still don't get aging the characters as much as they did.
Brandon Scott: He is a draw in this type of vehicle. He has two films in the top five in the marketplace, which is not easy to do. I would still say Journey is the bigger surprise overall. The only thing surprising about the new Mummy is that the franchise wasn't wrapped in a tomb two films ago. The fact that it has made it this far still confounds me.
Scott Lumley: Sure, he might be a box office draw. Then again, if someone had me star in a $145 million production I might be a box office draw too. He's completely dispensable, and his track record does seem to back that up. Fraser is the guy they get when they couldn't budget in someone better.