Monday Morning Quarterback Part II
By BOP Staff
June 18, 2014
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Edwin Davies: Well, it's not a bad result, per se. Even accounting for inflation it saw some growth from the first one, the reviews were almost as strong the second time around and the response from viewers seems to be very positive, so it has a lot of things in its favor. But I think a lot of people, myself included, thought that it would break away from the behavior of the first film, which famously had a pretty muted opening but went on to show tremendous legs. Instead, it seems to be repeating the pattern, just with slightly higher numbers.
While I think that the film will ultimately do fine, partly due to its quality and in-built affection for the series, and partly due to the lack of any other animated films being released throughout the rest of the summer (other than Planes: Fire and Rescue, which seems like a non-factor) I'm struggling to think why exactly it didn't do better, especially since the last big animated film was Rio 2, which came out all the way back in April and was only a moderate success at best. (Also, I'd completely forgotten that Oz movie was released, and it's probably best if we all go ahead and do that.)
The two most likely reasons, for me, seem to be the four year gap between the first and second films, which might be too long to keep the attention of the younger audience who fell in love with the first film, and the fact that the ads focused more on the drama and adventure of the story rather than any comedy. The great strength of the first How to Train Your Dragon was its heart and sincerity, sprinkled with a bit of humor, but in general animated films do better if they can put a few jokes in the trailers to appeal to adults. While the approach that DreamWorks took was probably more true to the movie, it probably limited the appeal at this initial stage.
However, considering the lack of competition, I'd be surprised if ultimately it doesn't at least get close to the final total of the first How to Train Your Dragon while hugely expanding overseas, which would more than justify making more of them for years to come.
Matthew Huntley: I'm with Edwin on this in that I can't completely rationalize why HTTYD2 didn't open bigger - in fact, a lot bigger, especially since the original was so beloved and critically lauded. I imagine it has something to do with a still-strong Maleficent continuing to win over the family audience, but I thought this demographic would be eating the Dragon toon up with relative ease, perhaps to the tune of $70-$80 million. I'm reminded of when Star Trek Into Darkness opened to somewhat disappointing numbers last year. That too was a follow-up to a very successful original (both audience and critical reception-wise), but it ultimately came in under expectations. I can see DRAGON 2 matching its predecessor, but perhaps not by enough to justify another sequel. Perhaps too much time passed between 2010 and 2014 that those who loved the first movie have grown up and simply weren't interested.
Felix Quinonez: It's hard to find a reason not to call this a disappointing opening for HTTYD2. Technically it's a fine opening and when you add in the overseas grosses I think it will see a profit. But given what we know about how sequels behave and how the reputation of the predecessor impacts its opening weekend, I was expecting to see a much bigger growth. I guess when it comes down to it, four years is a long time and perhaps the ads could have showcased more humor. But even with that taken into consideration, I think it should have seen a bigger opening weekend.
It reminds me a lot of Kung Fu Panda 2. The first installment of that franchise grossed roughly the same as HTTYD domestically, was well reviewed and loved by audiences. The sequel received almost as good reviews but for some reason it didn't receive any sort of box office bump domestically. Not only that but it also opened against an R rated comedy sequel (The Hangover Part II). It seems that like with Kung Fu Panda 2, at least part of HTTYD2's disappointing opening weekend is a mystery.
Jay Barney: I understand the discussion about box office buzz and this being a "disappointing" opening, but I think it only goes so far. How to Train Your Dragon never was Despicable Me, or Monsters, Inc., or Toy Story. It was a great film that had a nice opening, saw some great legs, and went on to make a lot of money. I'm one to sit back and watch the numbers before taking that discussion much further.
I'd also like to point out that the budget for How to Train Your Dragon 2 somehow came in very near or even less than the original, which is crazy in an industry where studios spend so much. From an accounting perspective, it opened higher than the original, is going to surpass the profit of the original sooner, and won't have ANY of the competition the original had.
When the How to Train Your Dragon opened in 2010....Diary of a Wimpy Kid was already in theaters. Alice in Wonderland was still going strong. By some fluke in the schedule How to Train Your Dragon 2 is going to be the ONLY kids offering for a full month. That is four consecutive weekends of this being the only choice for families with kids. Now it may be difficult to match the awesome holds of the original, but when there is NO competition, legs should be pretty easy.
David Mumpower: People are mentioning Maleficent as a competitive negative and the lack of upcoming movies as a positive. I maintain what I always have, which is that competition is a concept that is wildly overstated in terms of actual impact on a box office performance. None of the titles in release impacted the performance of How to Train Your Dragon a significant amount nor will they do so with the sequel.
The issue instead is that the latest adventure of Toothless is behaving similarly to how Po did in Kung Fu Panda 2. Both films were successors to wildly popular projects that had glowing word-of-mouth due to their outstanding quality. In May of 2011, Kung Fu Panda 2 opened to $47.7 million, effectively matching How to Train Your Dragon 2 in terms of tickets sold after we adjust for inflation.
Is this a good enough result? The answer is absolutely yes. How to Train Your Dragon grossed half a billion dollars worldwide with “only” $217.6 million coming from domestic revenue. It was an unqualified success despite its hefty $165 million budget. The sequel costs less because the original film overcame a troubled production that added years to its creative process. So, a $145 million production with solid overseas potential is in great shape after a near-$50 million debut. None of us are questioning that.
The million dollar question is why such a wonderful franchise has witnessed so little expansion in terms of opening weekend gross. The awareness for the project was high enough that it was tracking as the clear number one project yet it wound up far short of 22 Jump Street. While some have maintained that the somber nature of How to Train Your Dragon 2 damaged the opening weekend, I am of the opinion that few consumers would have known about this issue and thereby avoided the film.
Instead, I have to circle back to the recent struggles of all DreamWorks Animation releases. This weekend represents the fourth time out of their last five releases that box office analysts have been left scratching their heads about a DreamWorks title. How to Train Your Dragon 2 joins the list with Rise of the Guardians, Turbo and Mr. Peabody and Sherman as a film that did well but SHOULD have done better.
Kim Hollis: Chef, the unheralded movie from Iron Man director Jon Favreau, earned another $2.2 million this weekend, making this the fifth consecutive weekend it has finished either ninth or 10th at the box office. So far, it has earned $14.1 million domestically. What do you think of this result?
Edwin Davies: Chef seems like one of the really under-appreciated box office stories of the summer. It hasn't quite broken through in a huge way, but ever since it opened in limited release it has expanded at a gradual but significant rate, and each weekend has either seen big increases or steady holds. This is a pretty much perfect way of handling a small film that has a crowd-pleasing sensibility, akin to what Little Miss Sunshine did back in summer 2006, albeit to more modest results. I'm not sure how much more room it has to grow from here on out without a big expansion, but it's already done exceptionally well for a film that no one really seems to be talking about that much. It probably means a lot for Jon Favreau, too, if he wants to keep making smaller films, rather than returning to the kind of big-budget filmmaking that seemed to wear him down (and directly shaped the story of Chef itself). Even if he does go back to that kind of directing, the success of a personal movie on his terms would probably rejuvenate him more than signing on for another film with a nine digit budget.
Felix Quinonez: I think the result is just fine. There is really nothing bad to say about it but it seems that it's coming in just below the level it would need to break out. It's doing well but not well enough to get people talking about it or to justify any sort of big expansion. It will have a decent run and quietly leave the theaters, neither a hit nor a miss.
David Mumpower: I suspect that Felix’s opinion is the one held by most people, and that must be frustrating to all of the smaller scale filmmakers in the world. Because Jon Favreau has created mega-blockbusters, people are inclined to shrug off a title like this, a return to his roots. Nobody knows this now but Swingers earned less than $5 million domestically. Amazingly, that total represented a tremendous return on investment, at least theoretically, for a movie that cost about $200,000 to produce.
Favreau had not participated in a small project in a decade, so I understand why Chef would be appealing to him. He appeared on a recent season of Top Chef as a guest judge, his stated goal being that he wanted to research how lifelong food makers learned their craft. That sort of authenticity has shined through. It also explains why Chef has received glowing reviews while maintaining stunning consistency at the box office. The film has finished in either ninth or 10th place at the box office for 19 straight days. Nobody could do that if they tried.
We are discussing a film that opened to $3.6 million during its “opening” weekend that has a current box office tally of $14.2 million. It is not only a tremendous performer but also among the leggiest movies in recent memory. During its second weekend in wide release, Chef grossed $1.9 million; last weekend, that total was $2.2 million for its fourth weekend. Anyone working at a theater that features independent cinema knows just how steady and reliable Chef has been.