Monday Morning Quarterback Part III
By BOP Staff
March 24, 2009
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Kim Hollis: Duplicity, the Clive Owen/Julia Roberts spy romance, opened to $14 million. What do you think of this result?
Tim Briody: Um, yikes. I remember seeing the Super Bowl ad and was ready to pencil this in for $100 million-plus. Either everyone is completely over Julia Roberts or Clive Owen has just been rejected by American audiences for good.
Jason Lee: To me, the main problem with the commercials and trailers was that it seemed like Julia Roberts' character was going to spend the entire movie playing Owen's character. That's not much of a joust to me. Without this type of parity in terms of abilities and tactics, it just didn't seem like a really engaging film.
Brandon Scott: Jason is right in large part. And the possibility that Tim raises is a real one. Are audiences over Julia and/or burned out on Clive? I was/am interested in the film, as it appeals to a more mature film-going segment, but that being said, I kind of see it as an Ocean's Eleven with two people. I expect a cool movie, breezy and fun, but ultimately forgettable. I haven't seen it (yet) but I suspect that it had a bit of a high-brow nature to it that kept it from reaching a broader audience. It wasn't a romantic comedy and Clive was just in The International which had a similar "look" to it, even though I know they are drastically different films. Plus, Michigan was playing in the tourney this weekend (robbed by the refs, by the way) so that kept some fans from turning out right away.
Joel Corcoran: I think Jason nails it. Based on the trailers and TV ads, this movie seems to be little more than a couple scenes of Ocean's Eleven (with Clive Owen playing the part of George Clooney) put on repeat and stretched into two hours. The "heist-with-a-romantic-twist" formula has long been successful in Hollywood (see: The Thomas Crown Affair), but that storyline depends on the romantic leads coming together to battle some bigger opponent or enemy. This movie seems like a less coherent version of Intolerable Cruelty, so I'm not that surprised at its soft performance at the box office.
Sean Collier: Julia Roberts needs another megahit and Clive Owen needs a mainstream project that raises his cache as a household name. Neither one of them have done much money lately; if they both had just had a monster hit and Duplicity came out, it would've done the $100 million that Tim was expecting. We film dorks have a long memory - the public at large does not.
Max Braden: For any other pair, this result would have been acceptable, but for Julia Roberts it's a huge disappointment. Forbes' industry survey ("Star Currency") of most bankable movie stars put her at number 11 out of 1400 last month. Duplicity offered viewers the kind of Roberts they remembered from Notting Hill, The Runaway Bride, and Erin Brokovich, which each opened to $27-35 million. Sure those titles were a decade ago, and Clive Owen doesn't have the same draw as Clooney or Hugh Grant, but to pull in less than $20 million is a surprise.
Daron Aldridge: I fully expected this to be more where Knowing ended up based solely on Julia Roberts and the playful tone of the film. The ads I was seeing actually seemed more balanced than what Jason viewed. The fact that it did seem a little too much like so many of her previous roles (multiple uses of her laughing in the ads) might have been its downfall. People could've have just thought they could pop in a DVD of Runaway Bride or Pretty Woman to see that kind of Julia Roberts instead of driving to a theater and spending $25 on a date night.
Kim Hollis: I think it's a middling result. Roberts has been out of sight and mind for a pretty good period now and Owen has not proven to be a draw in any way. I do think it was under-marketed to some degree, but this should be a better money maker on DVD than in theaters. It's targeted more to adults and those are the people who are willing to wait. There's certainly nothing about Duplicity that screams "I *must see this in the theater."
David Mumpower: I think Kim has hit upon the most fascinating aspect. I'm not certain Duplicity was ever intended to be a huge box office blockbuster. It seemed to be targeting its home video success from the start. What we have to keep in mind with Julia Roberts is that the summer of Notting Hill and Runaway Bride was a full decade ago. For those of us who chronicled the box office success of those two similar titles, that may be hard to believe, but the reality is that Roberts has spent the body of the past five years being a mother. She hasn't been the main lead in a film since Erin Brockovich in 2000 unless you count Mona Lisa Smile, which I don't. The Twilight generation of movie-goers thinks of her as an actress their parents liked rather than a box office draw. This wasn't the film that was going to bring her back into the limelight. It was just a project she thought would be fun and it was marketed as such. I expect all involved had hoped it would do a bit better, but this probably isn't far away from the realistic expectations.
We'll just have a steel cage match to determine the winner...
Kim Hollis: Whose career do you think is in a better place for the next five years, Julia Roberts or Clive Owen? Why?
Josh Spiegel: I'd say Clive Owen here. With regards to Julia Roberts, I'm not too sure she cares about having a steady film career anymore. Her name is still big enough in Hollywood so she could be in any movie she likes, but with the family she has, Roberts is probably content to take a break. Owen is probably going to have a fine career; though he's never really had huge success at the box office (notwithstanding Inside Man, which probably would have done as well with or without him), he keeps making movies, and will likely keep on working for a good amount of time. Moreover, the performance of Duplicity wasn't great, but I'm not sure it's a flop. Owen'll be fine in the future, I'm sure.
Jason Lee: While I don't disagree with Josh's assessment of Julia's professional goals, I still think that five years from now, she's the bigger star. She's got more power in Hollywood (actress, producer, financier of her own production company) and still wields HUGE name recognition. Any project she's in will instantly have a higher profile. As for Clive, I'll need to see him open a movie bigger than The International before I put any eggs in his basket.
Joel Corcoran: I think Josh is right, but we also have to look at who has the incentive to work over the next five years. I can see Julia Roberts truly devoting herself to acting again 15 or 20 years from now, but she's publicly said that acting will take a second-place to her family for the time being. Clive Owen, on the other hand, has a steadily growing career, he's branching out into different types of roles, and the next five years will determine whether he continues progressing into bigger roles well into middle age and longer (like Clint Eastwood), or whether he simply fades into the background. I think Owen has much more at stake, but if he continues his current trend, he'll be at the top of his game five years from now.
Brandon Scott: All of you have had some valid and solid points...kudos. I do think that since the question stated "five years from now," though, I am going to say Julia. She has the bigger name and that's not going anywhere anytime soon. She has the power friends in Hollywood and has the power to get a movie green-lit, if she so chooses. I like Clive a lot, and men tend to have more opportunities, especially as they age, but as far as star wattage, he will never be what Julia was. I think in the end, that both of these actors are similarly at a point in their careers where stardom is not really the issue, so much as taking on projects of interest. So while I think Julia will indeed be family-focused over the next four years, she still has the ability to step back at any point in time and say "let's do this." She has the history here, the friends, the looks, and the Oscar. Both will be okay and are good actors, but Julia still wins I think in the end.
Tim Briody: Sorry, but after The International (Remember that? Anyone? Just last month? Really?) and now this, Clive Owen has just been given a code red by North America. Not getting the James Bond gig pretty much ruined his box office career. Julia Roberts' name recognition is still incredibly high and she does have the Oscar. She's fine.
Josh Spiegel: While I agree with Tim's summation of Roberts - she will be fine for a long, long time - I'm not so sure Owen's days are as numbered, if only because The International and Duplicity aren't his first major failures at the box office (I'm also not sure that Duplicity is really a failure). Movies like Shoot 'Em Up, King Arthur, Children of Men, Derailed....I'm not saying Owen's career up to this point has ever been filled with box office success, because it really hasn't. Still, if he's gotten this far, and if enough important people see him as star material, I don't think he needs to worry yet.
Max Braden: At this point they both seem to be at a plateau. For Clive Owen it depends on whether producers look at his box office or his reviews. The message the Duplicity box office sends is that Clive Owen was riding Julia Roberts' name recognition, and she didn't really deliver either. But I think most reviews of his acting abilities are strong. He's just going to have to find the project that lets him perform and also has box office appeal.
Daron Aldridge: I agree with Josh's latter comment but disagree with the former. I think that the studios are still enamored with making Clive Owen a star (must be that intriguing British accent) but if he doesn't attach himself to a hit, whether he is the reason for its success or not, they will probably abandon him. He needs a tentpole summer movie that he can ride the success of to other box office gold. Is there a British member of the Avengers that he can portray? But in five years, Julia Roberts will still be the same Julia Roberts in people's minds today and I don't see anything Owen being able to do that will let me eclipse her starpower.
Kim Hollis: I think that Owen has his fans and they'll continue to be a small and dedicated bunch. In the right movie, though, Roberts still has a lot of credibility and allure. I don't think she's in any hurry to take on a major project. She can afford to be discriminating. Owen, on the other hand, probably can't, much as I'd like to say otherwise. Movies like Inside Man and Sin City haven't done much for him, even though they should have. I still like him best in Closer and Croupier, so I wish he would just do small, quality stuff.
David Mumpower: I like this debate a lot. I think Tim has it drilled in that we need to shave with Occam's Razor here. Julia Roberts has attained a level of celebrity few actresses ever have or will. That cannot be taken away from her unless there is an OJ Simpson moment in her future. Meanwhile, Clive Owen is the industry's biggest enigma of the moment. Almost all of his films are good and several have been great with Children of Men being an instant classic. He has a reputation for reliable performer who will offer a fine performance in any role. People like that are a rarity and they offer a rare element of control to the fundamentally mercurial nature of movie productions. Despite all of this and the fact that most people seem to either like or love him, his movies don't make much at the box office. If we don't count his small but memorable role in The Bourne Identity, Owen has never had a $100 million domestic earner. Inside Man and Sin City are his only two titles to make at least $55 million in North America. There is a strange and confounding disconnect between what his career is and what it should be. Would I be surprised if that had changed in five years and he were considered a draw? No. Do I expect that to happen, though? Of course not. If Children of Men doesn't break out on the heels of Inside Man, I fear he's missed his window.
Pete Kilmer: David and Kim hit the nail on the head. People under 25 don't care about Julia. She has no real draw for that crowd. And the fact that Julia was away for five years having a family really made most people kind of forget about her. And her audience is much more likely to Netflix her movies these days then to go out to the theater and deal with that hassle of going to a film.