Monday Morning Quarterback Part III
By BOP Staff
January 12, 2012
BoxOfficeProphets.com

This is why 3D isn't catching on.

(Exclamation point!)

Kim Hollis: We Bought a Zoo, the feel-good holiday movie from Cameron Crowe, fell 37% to $8.3 million and has a running total of $58 million. What do you think of this result?

Edwin Davies: This is way better than I thought the film was going to do before Christmas since I fully expected it to get slaughtered based on the trailers and just the whole damn premise of the film. Turns out that people like cute animals, who knew? I think the feel good factor definitely helped the film over the holidays, but I'm not sure how much more life it has in it going forward, especially since it is unlikely to get any strong boost from any of the major awards bodies.

Bruce Hall: There's a glut of Oscar bait and fuzzy wuzzy family fare clamoring for our attention at the end of every year, and this movie made a dent and paid its bills in three weeks. Everything from here out is gravy. I don't think there will be much reason to discuss it again after this week, and I doubt it will get much love from the Academy - but We Bought a Zoo is going to finish solidly in the black.

It seems you've won again, Matt Damon.

Max Braden: Two family-friendly-animal-centric holiday films neck and neck! I can't *wait* to see which one wins!

Brett Beach: To build off Max's comment: it might be a horse race, with Oscar nods for War Horse making the difference between an otherwise photo finish. This is also a better than expected run so far, particularly since it didn't explode out of the chute Marley and Me-wise, even with two successful sneak previews and a month for that word-of-mouth to build. I would gather that War Horse is the pick for families with older children, and this the choice for ones for smaller fry, but my question remains: which zoo animal has the Lloyd Dobler role here?

David Mumpower: Ordinarily, Cameron Crowe films are either huge hits or earn less than $35 million domestically. We Bought a Zoo appears to be slotting somewhere in the middle, which is unusual behavior for BOP's most beloved director. I think everyone has touched upon the obvious key aspects, the cut animals, but I also think there is some correlation to Vanilla Sky here. No, the movies do not have anything in common in terms of story but the reason why Vanilla Sky earned $100 million was star power. Due to the glowing quality of Crowe's films, he can talk the most famous actors in the world into starring in whatever role he needs, which is why Tom Cruise and Cameron Diaz are willing to be disfigured while Matt Damon and Scarlet Johansson will walk around in animal crap. Rare talents such as Crowe entice A-list actors to do things they would never consider otherwise. And then when the cute animal movie is released, people give it a longer look since it's got Jason Bourne and Black Widow in it.


The movie should have just been about the dog.

Kim Hollis: The Adventures of Tintin, the other Steven Spielberg movie in the top ten, fell 41% to $6.7 million. Its running total is $63.3 million (though its international total is at about $260 million). What do you think of this result?

Edwin Davies: The main point that has been made about Tintin for weeks now is that the domestic performance was always going to be gravy owing to the international gross, which made the film very profitable before it had opened Stateside. However, just because the film didn't have to do well doesn't mean that this result isn't a little disappointing, since it's a really fun, exciting adventure story with plenty of Spielbergian spectacle - including a chase through a Turkish market which really has to be seen to be believed - and seems like the perfect introduction to the world of Herge. No one involved is going to be crying over this result since Tintin has already done well enough to guarantee a sequel, but they probably hoped that it would do better if only to set the stage for the next film.

Bruce Hall: I agree completely - studios are learning to factor international gross into their strategy but this doesn't mean you don't want North Americans to step up to the plate for you. This is a pretty lopsided cume so far, but I don't expect anyone involved to have any trouble sleeping over it. After all, leave it to Spielberg to be the one who finally produces a mo-cap film that doesn't scare people or make them violently ill.

I suppose next, he'll cure cancer. And then of course, George Lucas will ruin it for everyone.

Max Braden: This clearly looks way too French to appeal to American audiences. The only way you're going to get stateside viewers for a project like this is to get Michael Bay into motion capture animation.

Brett Beach: I made a very bold prediction about the international to domestic gross a few MMQBs ago for the Adventures of Tintin and it may take until the final tally to see if I am as right as I hoped to be. This is pulling less international and slightly more domestic than I would have thought, which goes to show how little this would have made here if there weren't last names of Jackson and Spielberg involved. There will probably be an upswing all around if Jackson does indeed helm the next one.

Reagen Sulewski: I think it's noble of studios to look outside North America for ideas for franchises, but you can't manufacture a fan base over night (anyone remember those Asterix movies? Anyone? No?). But it's a big world out there, and with as much money as this made internationally, I think we're going to see people run with the idea of making movies specifically for Europe.

David Mumpower: I understand why people are pessimistic about this result, but $63 million is a total I consider close to best case scenario all things considered. This is a strange looking movie that has absolutely impenetrable trailers. In the War Horse conversation, we spoke of the drawing power of Spielberg's name. What I take from this performance is that even if we add Peter Jackson as a selling point, most people still largely decided this wasn't worth their time. Call $63 million a win.

Too many commas.

Kim Hollis: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy expanded from 57 to 809 theaters this weekend, and was rewarded with a 405% increase in box office to $5.5 million. What do you think of this result?

Edwin Davies: The short answer is that people just can't get enough of British people looking meaningfully at each other, and Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy features pretty much every British person ever.

The long answer is that this is a textbook example of how to expand a film. Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy has spent the last couple of weeks building up steam in limited release, garnering great reviews and solid word-of-mouth, and this expansion has come at just the right time to make more people aware of the film as awards season, which could be very kind to it, is just starting to gear up.

Bruce Hall: The only thing I can add to what Edwin just said is that it escapes me how they overlooked Michael Caine. They couldn't have at least cast him as a sympathetic cab driver/double agent who ends up slumped over his steering wheel halfway through the second act? Shameful. Positively shameful.

Max Braden: I was really surprised to see a packed theater for the mid-afternoon Sunday showing I attended. On the opposite side of the coin from the Devil Inside crowd I was imagining, I can see the fans of this cast feeling that the holiday rush was over and they finally got to see the important film they've been waiting to see. Prior to seeing Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, I was really expecting it to be among the frontrunners at the Oscars. On the other hand... I found it so slow that I napped twice and was still able to follow the story. I expect this will be a love-it or hate-it title, and will stall at this level of expansion, especially since I don't expect it to have a presence at the Oscars.

Brett Beach: Contrary to Max, I think this may be the film that gets suprisingly more Oscar nods than anyone expects. However, as much as it pains me to consider this, I am surprised to hear all the talk about Gary Oldman's performance as a) I don't think it was a lead (truth be told, I don't think there any leads in the cast) and b) there were several performances better than his. The final tally of this will rest on Oscar nominations. It has worked the slow but steady expansion as well as any film can and this past weekend was a smashing success on that front.

Reagen Sulewski: Really, it's a situation where everyone looked around and said, "What the hell? Oldman doesn't have an Oscar nomination yet? We'd better fix that right damn now." But yes, this is some pretty old-school classic expansion behavior and it's performing quite nicely.

David Mumpower: Given the precise but methodical pacing of the movie, I never expected to earn a significant amount at the box office. Its current pattern indicates receipts north of $30 million and that number could bump up higher if there are a lot of Oscar nominations in the offing. This borders on being a miraculous performance barring anything unforeseen.

Afterthought.

Kim Hollis: The Darkest Hour, a Christmas Day horror release that has done pretty terribly so far, held up pretty decently this weekend as it fell 25% to $3.1 million. Its total to date is $19.3 million. What do you think of this result?

Edwin Davies: It held well because it was starting from a pretty terrible place. This has been a disaster from day one, and I don't see things getting better over the next couple of weeks. If the film makes back its $30 million budget I will be very surprised.

Max Braden: I had seen a trailer but I had just assumed this was a direct-to-video title. Considering that obstacle, $19 million isn't too bad. It's like some wispy demon snuck up and picked the pockets of some theater-goers who were there to see something else that was sold out.

Brett Beach: It's a win for a film that would have struggled to get to Jonah Hex or MacGruber numbers any other time of year. Those of us who have no plans to ever see it can remain in wonder about Emile Hirsch's presence.

Reagen Sulewski: Summit is very, very lucky they locked up the Twilight franchise.

David Mumpower: The performance of The Darkest Hour felt like a strong indictment of cheap horror movies right up until The Devil Inside exploded. So, the existence of that film steps on the point I want to make. Then again, The Devil Inside is already down to fourth place after five days in theaters; ergo, I'm ready to write that off as short term mass delusion.

Tim Briody: Reagen is right. I think Summit is just trolling audiences with all their non-Twilight films. Good thing that's a never ending money train. Oh, wait.

David Mumpower: This is exactly why I do not understand why Lionsgate is trying to buy Summit Entertainment now. There is only one Twilight left. It's like trying to trade for Peyton Manning today instead of three seasons ago.