Monday Morning Quarterback Part II
By BOP Staff
February 16, 2010
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Kim Hollis: The Wolfman opened to $30.6 million. Given the troubled production, doesn't it feel like Universal should be happy with this result?
Josh Spiegel: Absolutely. Universal would be crazy not to be happy here. With or without a troubled production, February is a weird time of year to release horror movies; what's more, Valentine's weekend seems even stranger, even with the idea of couples going to be scared together. Also, as much as I think Benicio Del Toro, Anthony Hopkins, Emily Blunt, and Hugo Weaving are interesting and talented actors, they don't often set the box office afire. Finally, the reviews were all pretty negative (though not as negative as with Valentine's Day), so had I been a Universal executive, I'd have hoped in my wildest dreams for a $20 million opening weekend. All things considered, this is a great result.
Michael Lynderey: This may well have been the best-case scenario, and Universal should definitely be satisfied. But I can't help and think that Wolfman was originally intended to be a strong $100 million+ tentpole picture - everything about the film, including the budget, director, and some of the early release dates, indicates that it was made to compete on a whole different level than the one it's ended up on. That said, I don't know why the studio kept on delaying poor Wolfie so much - it's a decent enough film, and it's got some very well-made action scenes. Seems unnecessary to brand it with the red flag of constant date changes.
Tim Briody: This is astounding. We've stated many times before that there is never a finite amount of box office dollars available on any given weekend, but the top three films just made $113 million. Add in Avatar and the top four took in $135 million. If you saw that coming, raise your hand. I didn't think so. Yes, Universal should be ecstatic that they got away with what they did.
Reagen Sulewski: This, to me, is the most surprising result of the weekend. People don't really care about troubled productions, but it's rarely something that results in a good movie. I personally love the look of gothic horror but it's kind of fallen out of favor and I expected it this to make a bit of a thud, considering how poorly reviewed it was. $30 million does feel like a missed opportunity, but it's a far better feeling that Universal has to have than they did four days ago.
Tom Macy: Percy and V-Day have much more tangible reasons for their success, such as teenagers and the title of the movie being the name of the day people saw it - now we know why the Ice Cube Friday franchise exists. The writing on the wall for Wolfman to flop was written so clearly, Universal was practically apologizing for this film's failure before it was released. You gotta give movie-goers some credit here for checking this one out despite the bad reviews citing a "tonal identity crisis" which, given all the reshoots to "add more action," don't surprise me. Universal no doubt is thrilled. But I'll also take a cue from Michael and say that once the relief/excitement Universal is now feeling subsides they're going to wonder if things had been handled more cleanly if this could have shone a little brighter.
Jason Lee: I think a lot of credit here has to go to the marketing team at Universal. They managed to cherry-pick key sequences to mash together some pretty-darn-cool-looking special effects shots. If you weren't more familiar with this project, you have might actually bought a ticket with the thought that you were about to see a pretty good movie.
Pete Kilmer: Yeah, it's pretty solid. For a picture that the director walked away from they have to be pleased with this.
We're just waiting for the next Blart
Kim Hollis: We've seen four debuts over $30 million in the last two weeks. Do you see this as a fluke or do you think February is going to start experiencing the same success that January has had over the last couple years?
Josh Spiegel: It's only a fluke if studios don't pick up on the idea that people will actually see movies all year if the products look interesting, good or bad reviews notwithstanding. Obviously, this February is more similar to last year's January; again, it's all about marketing products. People were interested in seeing a romantic comedy at the most romantic time of year, or getting scared, or watching kids tussle with Greek gods. If studios were filled with smart people, they'd realize that the early months of the year don't have to be a dead zone.
Michael Lynderey: January really only had one mega-month, and that was in the freakazoid year of 2009 (it's true that January '08 had some big titles, too, but they were about on par with Jan. '05 and '01-'02). While this February has had some steep openings so far, that may say more about frontloading than anything else - the only one of the four big openers I see making $100 million right now is Valentine's Day. Even if there are more three-digit earners (Percy Jackson is hard to call), that wouldn't necessarily be too far removed from some previous Februarys - there's the famous '91 edition with The Silence of the Lambs ($130 million) and Sleeping with the Enemy ($101 million), as well as other good years like 2003, 2005, and 2007. Could February gradually become a definitively bigger month? It's possible, but we'll have to wait and see. February '09 didn't have a single $100 million earner, so there's not a strong trend yet.
Reagen Sulewski: You're never going to see a studio risk a true top flight "summer" film in this period: No Transformer 3s or Superman: Rebooted: This Time It'll Be Good, We Mean It! Look We Got Chris Nolan! and nor should they, as those summer weekday box office figures can add about 10% or more to a final total. But there's also value in being a big fish in a small pond. It's a lot easier to stand out in this time and get eyes on your films. The first battle in opening a film is getting people to know you exist.
Tom Macy: I think that this tentpole films all the time trend is – amazingly - still expanding. With superheroes and ‘80s action figures soaking up all the obvious dates, summer and the holidays, second tier films - with solid built-in audiences of their own - are starting to create their own second tier slots. Look at what happened to March after Ice Age: 2 and 300. After this weekend, I expect President's say to be a slot studios fight over just like they fought over the first weekend in May after Spider-Man in 2002. As to why this is happening? It's kind of a weird chicken or the egg type of phenomenon. Are studios convincing people they want to see these movies at this time of the year? Or are audiences influencing the studios? I don't know, but I feel like it has something to do with Tom Cruise.
Jason Lee: This whole thing is cyclical. I don't think anyone is arguing that studios dial January back simply because we didn't have a Taken or a Paul Blart this year . . . I think this February is just an exceptionally strong moviegoing month. Of course, if James Cameron decides to open his new film, "President's Day Weekend," next year in February, then it's a whole different discussion.
Pete Kilmer: I do. I think the studios will stake out the week before and during V-day for romance movies. The first weekend and last weekend we'll see some horror related and lower level action movies.
Kim Hollis: What we're learning is that a movie can break out on almost any weekend if it appeals to the right target audience and is marketed well or buzzed about. There are a couple of weekends that remain black holes, but I imagine that at some point over the next few years we'll even see something surprising happen there.