Monday Morning Quarterback Part I
By BOP Staff
December 22, 2008
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Kim Hollis: Yes Man, Jim Carrey's latest high-profile comedy, opened to $18.2 million. What do you think of this result?
Pete Kilmer: It's not terrible. But it's also not good. It's going to be tough to make Jim Carrey the box office draw he once was. The movie-going public has been heavily burned by a lot of his past choices for roles and frankly he doesn't want to see those roles of the past (Bruce Almighty, and Liar Liar) that brought him to the table.
Brandon Scott: I'll agree with Pete. I honestly think that he has been away too long from this sort of role to draw what he once did. Others have come in to replace him. The fact that Yes Man seemed to be Liar Liar Part Deux was a double-edged sword. I think audiences feel they already saw this several years ago from him and comedies aren't usually ripe sequel material (even though this wasn't per se. You get my drift). There could be something to the weather affecting some things, but this clearly didn't take off.
I will also speculate that maybe his personal life could be affecting his popularity. Not that he is a bad guy at all, but his relationship with Jenny McCarthy, some weird grooming issues with the long shag hair, plus that wearing a women's bathing suit stunt...I don't know, I am just thinking that he is off and past his prime. I don't have any issues with him and like that he takes risks as an actor these days, even if the results have been mixed to say the least. I still think The Truman Show and Eternal Sunshine are some of his best work.
Joel Corcoran: It's kind of a sad result, actually. From a strict numbers perspective, it's a mediocre opening, but the movie should still have a profitable - though lackluster - performance in its box office run. That's assuming the movie's production budget is somewhere in the range of $50 million. But in a broader sense, it's rather depressing to see Jim Carrey continuing down this long, slow, agonizing slide of fading talent and stardom. Aside from whatever issues he's dealing with in his personal life (and I agree that's a factor), Carrey has obviously lost whatever comedic brilliance he had a even few years ago.
Max Braden: I skipped it in theaters because I've already seen Liar Liar and I didn't want to pay for a repeat. Trailing behind Judd Apatow's comedies, Yes Man also looked like it lacked much bite. In this economy, maybe those factors made the difference. I think it means a downward adjustment on the opening estimate for Bedtime Stories.
Scott Lumley: I haven't seen the movie, but I am really looking forward to catching it. And with that in mind, I'm not going to comment on whether or not Jim Carrey may be sliding down the ladder into obscurity.
(Pause)
Okay, screw that. I'll comment. You people are all crazy! Every trailer I saw for this movie looked ridiculously funny and it's a pure comedy for Carrey, so it should be a money machine. It obviously hasn't been that money machine this weekend, and I'm a little mystified by that. We do have the Christmas holiday weekend coming up, and this is as pure a holiday weekend as you can really get with Boxing day falling on a Friday and the segue right into Saturday.
I would say this result has a lot to do with last minute Christmas shopping, the absolutely BRUTAL weather and possibly a little bit of movie fatigue. This is going to be one of those films that will post better results next weekend than it did this weekend. I'm thinking a result in the $20-$25 million range, maybe more, followed by some decent legs.
Tim Briody: On the surface it's of course massively disappointing, but keep some perspective in that it's December and Christmas is a few days away. It's going to have some very good numbers over the next two weeks. It's easy to forget that Fun With Dick and Jane earned $110 million. Yes Man will pass that with ease.
Sean Collier: A "long, slow, agonizing slide of fading talent and stardom," eh, Joel? At least he can join a support group with Mike Myers and Eddie Murphy. Meet Dave, The Love Guru and Yes Man: three 2008 comedies with former superstars that dramatically underperformed. Yes Man managed a somewhat respectable opening - probably due to being the only halfway decent film of the bunch - but still, there's a trend here. Memo to old dogs: learn new tricks.
Reagen Sulewski: Whoa, whoa, whoa. Let's not say things we can't take back. Meet Dave was Pluto Nash-esque in its performance, while Love Guru didn't even earn back half its budget domestically. With the help of the Christmas season, Yes Men should at least find its way to $75-80 million.
I think there's a couple things at play here. On the surface, it seemed really reasonable that after such a long time out of the public eye (he's the anti-Sam Jackson in some respects), going back to square one with his film career was what the doctor ordered. The problem with that seems to be in misjudging whether people really cared about the old Jim Carrey.
David Mumpower: "...last minute Christmas shopping, the absolutely BRUTAL weather and possibly a little bit of movie fatigue." Let's all thank Mr. Lumley for throwing out every tired cliche studio bosses use as excuses for a film's lackluster performance. Of course, the weather had no discernible impact on the other releases in the marketplace - look at the depreciation for the in-release title and absolutely nothing is out of line - so the first two excuses are already dismissed out of hand. Then, let's consider for a moment the idea of movie fatigue and how that would be impacted by the last couple of weeks of The Day The Earth Stood Still's under-performing preceded by two non-openers finishing in first and second the prior week. We can safely rule out movie fatigue there. What have we learned in doing so? That's Yes Man has disappointed to the point that we're breaking out the biggest excuses in the game to cover up its failure. Reagen is right that Yes Man can still wind up north of $75 million due to the holiday box office inflation tide that raises all boats, but much more was expected of this title. Warner Bros. wanted a better result here, and they didn't get it.
If only he would have done that Dumb and Dumber sequel...
Kim Hollis: Do you think Jim Carrey is past his prime as a box office draw, or has he just chosen poor projects recently?
Pete Kilmer: He chose some bad projects. He wanted to grow beyond what he was doing, and to be fair he certainly should have taken chances in his roles; however, the audience didn't want him to change. Some of the projects he picked weren't that good (The Number 23). One of his acclaimed movies, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, didn't reach the mass public. He's not past his prime, but he's getting there for the type of man-child roles that make him big money.
Brandon Scott: I pretty much covered this in my last post. I think he IS past his prime, although you can't complain with the run he had and his position in life. I would like to see him continue to stretch himself here and there and hey, it's not like he can't retire comfortably. This is the guy who brought us Fire Marshall Bill after all. No complaints.
Shane Jenkins: This should have been a home run, and I suspect Carrey intentionally chose it to make a comeback from the likes of The Number 23 (one of the worst movies I've ever seen, by the way). But like Fun With Dick and Jane, something seems...off...about it, like he's trying too hard to make us laugh when it used to appear so effortless. Yes Man feels like a title from the '90s, and therefore sort of out-of-touch with the current state of comedy. Maybe Carrey should work with Paul Rudd or David Wain...
Joel Corcoran: I think Shane is onto something. It's not that Jim Carrey is past his prime, it seems more like his judgment about what projects to take and how to play the roles he accepts is completely off. Carrey is stuck in a rut based on a string of roles that haven't really hit his talents as an actor, and it does seem like he's just trying way too hard. He's like a struggling quarterback who over-thinks the game too much.
Scott Lumley: I think Jim Carrey's choice in projects is the main reason for his crippled box office juggernaut status. He's determinedly stuck to his guns and has attempted to stretch himself into new directions and ranges and has had mixed successes. I really had some high hopes for Carrey to post some monster numbers on Yes Man to redeem himself a bit. Regardless of what is going on in his personal life, I've always enjoyed him in nearly every single role he's ever tried.
It's possible he's headed down the Robin Williams career path, which would indicate several middling projects with the occasional blockbuster thrown in, but not necessarily with Carrey in the starring role. It's an all right thing to happen to a career, and nobody stays white hot forever, but a couple of years ago everyone would have said that Carrey's career should be a force of nature. It seems odd to look back at his career trajectory and watch what has happened.
Sean Collier: You have to wonder, though, whether it's just that he genuinely enjoys doing these over-the-top comedies. The Truman Show, The Majestic and Eternal Sunshine seemed to be steering his trajectory in a more serious direction, then he went back to Fun With Dick and Jane. Now, Yes Man. It seems like he can't stay away from twisting his face and making funny noises for more than a few years at a time. He doesn't need the money; this might just be fun for him.
Max Braden: The honeymoon may be over but his career doesn't have to be. It's interesting, though, that Adam Sandler is still as strong a draw as ever after some dramatic roles like Reign Over Me, while Carrey struggles to return to comedy after working in other genres.
David Mumpower: I see the problem exactly the opposite of Sean. I don't think Carrey is drawn to comedy in that regard. To the contrary, I see roles such as Fun with Dick and Jane and this one as purely cynical roles. Performances such as Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind are the ones he desperately covets. He wants that Academy Awards nomination so much he can taste it. While he continues to try to earn that bit of credibility his ego sorely needs, he has lazily determined that after a couple of projects like that, he can always go back to the rubber-face schtick he had mastered on In Living Color. This weekend, he received a wake-up call that he isn't that guy any more and he needs to try harder. He's in exactly the same boat as Mike Myers, which leads me to one conclusion: buddy movie! Oh, the horror.
Daron Aldridge: I can envision David's buddy comedy now with the "unlikely pairing" of Count Olaf and Fat Bastard as adopted brothers who go on a cross-country search for their birth parents. Fart jokes and creepy prosthetics abound. Even if Yes Man can pull off the impressing but often glossed over multiplier of Fun with Dick and Jane (5.24) for a total of $94 million, I would say that he is not past his prime, but Bruce Almighty will not happen again. Both titles seem humorous enough but utterly forgettable, which makes me wonder how Dick and Jane posted that final tally. January to March of 2005 must have been slooooow. I think that his diehard fans, like Scott, will still show up but that group seems to be dwindling in devoted membership.