Monday Morning Quarterback Part I
By BOP Staff
April 26, 2010
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Kim Hollis: The Back-Up Plan opened to $12.2 million. Why do you think it struggled to find an audience?
Josh Spiegel: This movie just looked like it wasn't trying. The ads were pervasive, but every ad made The Back-Up Plan look like every other romantic comedy that's been released in the past 20 years. And, from the negative reviews, that's what this movie was. Jennifer Lopez making a comeback didn't work as a story for the movie, because did anyone really need to have a comeback from J-Lo? I'm not that surprised at this result, all things considered.
Michael Lynderey: To my mind, this is a pretty good number, and frankly more than I was expecting. The Back-Up Plan is arriving - perhaps appropriately, given the title - as the last in a long tour of spring romantic comedies, most of which have fallen on the not-so-good side of the critical aisle (that's a club this film is also a member of). Add in the tidbits that Jennifer Lopez hasn't anchored a major film in five years, that Date Night is still a popular choice for this very demographic, as well as the generally uninspired air of the trailer, and I think $12 million is pretty much a best case scenario, if not a little beyond that.
This movie really needed Gerard Butler, is what I think I'm trying to say.
Matthew Huntley: I first saw a trailer for this movie back in December and in the four months since, it still hadn't convinced me it was anything but a generic rom-com ridden with the same old cliches. For instance, how many times is Hollywood going to pass off painful childbirth scenes as humor? Does anyone else think these were never funny to begin with?
Aside from its bland premise and title, the movie's failure can also be attributed to its lack of a well-known lead actor. Alex O'Loughlin is hardly a household name and he doesn't stand out much. Had the studio been able to convince a bigger star - say, Matthew McConaughey - to fill the role of "standard hunk guy," they probably could have assured themselves a bigger opening. With McConaughey, the studio could have also milked it as the first time he and J-Lo were on-screen together since The Wedding Planner. Not that that's a strong selling point.
Tim Briody: So Michael suggests Gerard Butler and Matthew suggests Matthew McConaughey. Are we implying that it's the male lead that makes romantic comedies hits?
Also, this movie was trying to jump the gun on The Switch and failed. That looks way better, by the way.
Michael Lynderey: I think it's the combination of leads that makes the movie a hit (in some cases, of course). Gerard Butler co-starring with Betty Nobody in The Back-Up Plan wouldn't have done much better, but when you run a Butler-Lopez ticket (or a McConaughey-Lopez one), it's a whole different story. The real top romantic comedy stars can open a movie like this very well even without a name running mate, but that field is pretty limited - maybe Katherine Heigl and Sandra Bullock, but even then it depends on other factors.
P.S. - I don't really see The Switch outperforming this film in any significant way.
Jason Lee: I agree with the point that (I believe) Michael and Matthew are implying, which is that the success of a rom-com relies largely on the perceived chemistry of the two leads. Tina Fey and Steve Carell sound like a hoot. Sandra Bullock and Ryan Reynolds are probably pretty funny together. With The Back-Up Plan, you have Lopez, who's been MIA for the past couple of years and a piece of generic man-candy. It's a much tougher sell.
Reagen Sulewski: Very few stars can take a number of years off and still have people be interested in their movies, which I think is what hit Lopez here. Especially if you come back with something as lame looking as this film, you turn into a "who cares?" very quickly, and Lopez was never that beloved in the first place.
David Mumpower: The height of her celebrity occurred with Jenny on the Block in 2002. Maid in Manhattan, her biggest blockbuster, was that year as well. I have never been a fan of saying that a movie is a career killer as I believe that talent will overcome a bad break here or there. If John Travolta and Nicolas Cage can keep getting work, anyone can. That’s the rule. There are occasional exceptions such as Batman & Robin destroying not one but two careers in Alicia Silverstone and Chris O’Donnell. Gigli proved to be that sort of situation for Lopez, who only struck gold once more with Monster-in-Law afterward. It gave her a lingering stink of failure perception with most consumers. Going away for a while could have helped if she had made a triumphant return in the right role. Stating the obvious, this wasn’t it and audiences couldn’t wait to turn their noses up at it.
On a sidenote, I do believe The Switch winds up +$20 million over this one’s final box office if not more.
Where’s that Out of Sight sequel?
Kim Hollis: Do you think this is it for Jennifer Lopez as a lead actress?
Josh Spiegel: I'm racking my brain for more than one good movie she's even been in, let alone as a lead. (That lonely movie is Out of Sight, by the way.) None of her movies have ever grossed $100 million. None of them. Three movies she's been in have gotten close, but one of those was Antz, which she lent her voice to. Aside from Maid in Manhattan, there are really no huge winners here (I'd like to forget having seen Monster-in-Law, so I'm ignoring that one). She's a beautiful woman, and she's not without a certain screen presence, but the movies she makes just don't do blockbuster business.
Michael Lynderey: I never really understood why Lopez bowed out of doing big movies after Monster-In-Law. That one was easily one of her most successful titles, and yet away she went. Looking to the future, I'm not sure we'll see Lopez headlining a solo lead role in the next year or two; but teaming up with a name actor - a Hugh Grant or a Gerard Butler - or showing up as part of the ensemble in that New Year's Day movie (if they ever make it) is a lot more plausible. And of course, if those films break out, I don't think a Bullock-esque comeback is out of the question somewhere down the line.
Matthew Huntley: Josh, I know they're heavily despised, but I also enjoyed Anaconda and The Cell, so I would contend that J-Lo has made more than one good movie.
To answer Kim's question: no, I don't think J-Lo's career as a lead actress is necessarily over. CBS Films may actually be satisfied with Back-Up Plans's opening numbers (realistically, it couldn't have cost that much to make). Lopez will continue to get top billing, but she needs another A-list star's name next to hers if the movie is going to open above $12 million.
Tom Macy: It certainly hurts her resume, but as you guys said, this movie's take is no embarrassment just a little underwhelming. I think there are growing trends, like the aforementioned ensemble comedies that will help J-Lo hang around for a little while leaving the door open for more headlining roles. That is contingent of course on her willingness to share the spotlight. But as of now she looks pretty dead in the water as a lead actress. The only projects she has on the docket are in development and this is her first film since 2006, which surprises me. So people clearly weren't going into J-Lo withdrawl. She's going to have to choose her next steps very carefully.
Jason Lee: J-Lo is too big of a name (yes, even in this day and age) to be truly dead as a viable lead actress. Hearkening back to my answer to the previous question, I think this is a question of chemistry. She needs a co-star (or a supporting cast) that will make people excited to see her on the screen. Lopez vs. Jane Fonda? That was an exciting prospect. Pair her with a romantic or comedic foil and I could see her being successful.
Reagen Sulewski: Yeah, once you reach a certain level of fame, you're never truly out of the running as a lead unless you do something horrible in the public (and even that's not a deal-breaker - see: Mel Gibson). Someday, someone might even find the right project for her that could be a hit. But she's got way too much negative baggage to have just anything be a hit for her.
David Mumpower: One of the aspects of box office performance that gets drowned out too much is how much of an eternity half a dozen years is. That takes a 10-year-old up to 16, meaning they go from children’s films from bad horror. A 16-year-old is now 22, meaning they’re far more focused on movies that are the start of a fun night out instead of an escape from the ‘rents. Jennifer Lopez’s absence from movies is important in this regard because she’s had almost that much of a gap between major releases. And we have to pre-date Gigli, going all the way back to The Wedding Planner and Maid in Manhattan to find that period where she was where Katherine Heigl is right now. It’s just too long an absence for her to overcome with her first major release in ages.
Monster-In-Law was an $82.9 million winner in 2005, Shall We Dance? was solid with $57.9 million, The Wedding Planner did $60.4 million, and Maid in Manhattan is her biggest hit to date at $93.9 million. Josh is right that her overall body of work is predicated upon the impeccable quality of Out of Sight, but she was a factor at one point. Has that gone away for good? I’m not one to be finite in an industry obsessed with comebacks. I have trouble finding a scenario where she becames a box office draw ever again, though. To my mind, the void she once filled no longer exists. It’s the brutal reality of the industry that younger is better. What happened with Sandra Bullock last year is unique for a reason.