Monday Morning Quarterback Part I
By BOP Staff
February 12, 2013
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Jay Barney: This is a great opening for Identity Thief, and as Kim alluded to in the Friday Box Office Analysis, the executives at Universal have to be breathing a little bit easier. Let’s just say their record over the last year isn’t stellar, with only a few solid money makers on the resume. Identity Thief will be welcome news.
An opening well over $30 million insures this will have met its budget by very soon, perhaps already. Even with reviews that are so-so, the film should have great numbers going into the next couple of weeks. The drop could be significant, but it won’t matter. Universal will have made money early in the game, and they can watch the return on their investment grow.
I’m not surprised this has turned into a pretty nice success for the studio. The trailer was funny enough, which matters a lot for a comedy. Melissa McCarthy does have a nice following now, especially after her role in Bridesmaids. Jason Bateman appears to have been a great casting success, considering his reserved, nuanced delivery of humor contrasts almost everything about McCarthy.
In the end Identity Thief should more than double its budget.
Bruce Hall: I think this is huge, actually. I have read one scathing review after another for this movie over the last few days, to the point you'd have to be living in a Tibetan monastery not to know how much most critics hate it. Still, it looks like Identity Thief is going to earn its production budget back by lunchtime tomorrow, if it hasn't already. I guess this just goes to show you - people absolutely LOVE Jason Bateman.
Edwin Davies: This is pretty astonishing, really. I was expecting an opening in the mid-20 million range, maybe even less given the adverse weather conditions, so to see it open so big is really quite a shock. I think it speaks to how big of an impact Melissa McCarthy made in Bridesmaids and with her work on Mike and Molly, whilst also indicating that there might have been a pent-up demand to see her really cut loose in a film after getting an Oscar nomination the first time around. Other than a brief appearance in This is 40, which relatively few people saw, she's not been in a film since Bridesmaids, so she hasn't been over-exposed yet or used up all the goodwill generated from that film. The generally lukewarm response from audiences seems to suggest that Identity Thief might dent her reputation somewhat (though we'll have to wait and see what happens with The Heat later this year to really get a sense of that) but this seems to be a good combination of a dearth of comedy, coupled with an actress whose career is ascending and a bunch of well edited trailers.
Reagen Sulewski: Hopefully we can all agree now that the next time some studio head tries to blame the weather for a poor opening, we can laugh in his face, right? Film going is an opportunistic behavior, and we saw a pretty clear demonstration that people had some downtime this weekend and managed to find a way to the theaters, snow storms and all. Every film was up over what you'd expect this weekend. Now, that didn't turn Identity Thief from a flop to a hit, but it's a factor.
Tim Briody: I thought this looked fairly dumb, it got pretty well roasted by the critics, but I knew it was going to be a hit. Broad comedy still works. It helps that Melissa McCarthy sells the ever living crap out of it in the trailer and ads. I always loved Sookie. Jason Bateman pretty much plays the same guy in every movie he's in now but it still works.
Kim Hollis: I do think that people were ready for a comedy, even a poorly reviewed one, as long as it had some recognizable, reliable faces. I wasn't expecting it to be this big, but mid-20s wouldn't have surprised me. I just wish it had been a better movie, because I wish nothing but the best for Melissa McCarthy.
Felix Quinonez: I think it has to do with the fact that the leads have goodwill from audiences, especially Melissa McCarthy. I also think it's due to the fact that it's pretty much the first big comedy this year. I know we already had A Haunted House but those spoof movies are tired.
David Mumpower: More than anything else, I believe that this comedy was concept driven. Director Seth Gordon caught lightning in a bottle with Horrible Bosses, an easily reliable premise. In selecting Identity Thief as his next premise, he must have been looking for a similarly engaging premise. Mismatched comedy is a consistent box office draw when marketed well. Eddie Murphy launched his career via this method while Ben Stiller has worked steadily in the 2000s for the same reason.
The other aspect that I think is important is that BOP has chronicled the Funny Fat Man genre that has had such notable inclusions as John Candy, John Belushi and Chris Farley. Bridesmaids has apparently launched Melissa McCarthy as the female equivalent. As a huge Gilmore Girls fan, I am thrilled to see her career reaching a new stratosphere just as I am a bit depressed that she will probably wind up typecast.
Kim Hollis: Side Effects, Steven Soderbergh's self-described final theatrical movie, opened to $9.3 million over the weekend. What do you think about this result?
Brett Ballard-Beach: It's always a tough call: You have a film with a lot of twists that starts out as one genre and winds up another. Barring that maybe a trailer can't do it justice, do you milk the hell out of it and spoil everything so people may rush to see it because they're comfortable enough or do you highlight the stars and the director and a certain amount of mystery and hope that good reviews and word-of-mouth will keep it going for two months instead of one? Open Road (admirably) opted for the latter and the end result won't be known for a few more weeks. This is a decent start considering its smaller-ish budget and it should have an extended life in the digital ether down the line.
Bruce Hall: If this movie is ever going to make a splash financially, it'll likely be on home video. It's gotten largely favorable reviews, and while the buzz surrounding Soderberg's supposed swan song appeals mainly to film enthusiasts, it'll no doubt help sales. I think this is the kind of twisty psychological thriller that would appeal to more people than saw it, but an underwhelming marketing campaign made sure very few people were aware of it.
Edwin Davies: I find it interesting that not only was the film kind of a tough sell because it twists and turns and because it's not really clear from the trailers who the main character actually is (I've seen two trailers for the film, one of which suggests that it is about Rooney Mara's journey and one suggesting that it's all about the effect she has on Jude Law) let alone what the movie is about, but also because Soderbergh himself is such a mercurial talent that it's hard to think which of his past works to use as a reference point for audiences. Contagion was the one that was prominently featured on the promotional material, which is probably the closest in tone, but you could have just as easily slapped Ocean's Eleven or Magic Mike on there to get more people interested in the concept. Those people would have been apoplectic at being sold a movie completely unlike those films, but it's indicative of how much of an obstacle being prolific and varied can be when trying to sell a movie to people.
With all that it had going against it, I think this is a pretty solid result. The film probably didn't cost all that much - despite the star wattage on display, I imagine most of the actors did it for a chance to work with Soderbergh one last time (or for the first time, in the case of Mara) rather than for a big pay check - and the reviews will either help it eke out a decent profit in theaters, or convince people to check it out on DVD. It's kind of subdued an end to Soderbergh's career - assuming he really does stay away for good - but by no means an embarrassment.
Reagen Sulewski: This is kind of reflective of changing tastes in film. There's just not an audience for thrillers anymore of the non-hyphenated variety (i.e. action-, romantic-, etc.) or that aren't based on a wildly popular book. And then you tell people it's about pills and *yawn*. Now, Soderbergh knows how to keep a budget down, so the film is likely to be okay financially. Is this a little sad? Probably, but at $13 a ticket, you'd better be bringing something special to audiences to get them to come.
Felix Quinonez: I think this opening is perfectly fine. Sure it would have been nice if Sodenbergh's (supposed) last movie was as big as, I dunno, Magic Mike, but I don't think that was ever in the cards for Side Effects. I just don't think a movie like this really appeals to mass audiences and the marketing campaign was a bit confusing. And while people who know and appreciate cinema respect Sodenbergh and his work I don't think he was ever a huge name with general audiences.
Kim Hollis: I think I mentioned once before that the marketing for this made it look like a TV movie of the week rather than something that was truly engaging and thrilling. I also think it's the kind of movie that people figure they can wait for on home video and then watch, because what's the hook to make you run out and see it in theaters? I'm not sure Soderbergh's "retirement" has even been well publicized (or that most movie-goers even care).