New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

All of the box office draws raise your hand. Not so fast, Dane Cook.

Kim Hollis: We casually touched upon the subject of box office draws last week. In the lull before the December box office storm, let's address the issue more fully. Other than the more obvious names like Will Smith, Tom Hanks and Johnny Depp, who are some people you consider to be respectable box office draws, and why? Conversely, who are some people you would argue are not box office draws despite their established celebrity?

Brandon Scott: I think in order to discuss this appropriately, we would need to establish what constitutes a draw. Is it someone that can open a movie on name alone? Is it someone who consistently has films end up with box office $50 million or more? Is it a star having his/her films consistently out earn the budget? By a certain percentage? I only lay it out like this because I don't think there is any sure-fire bankable draw outside of Will Smith (though Seven Pounds will again test his power). I think someone like Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie for example is a draw but to what extent? Jolie couldn't bring Changeling to big success. Pitt consistently has box office failures (in my mind). Troy, Jesse James and Burn After Reading all had Pitt but none saw great success (again relative to certain questions I asked above). His voice didn't aid Sinbad to great heights. And for Jolie we jave Sky Captain, A Mighty Heart, Alexander and The Good Shepherd? These are not hits, but they both get the big dollars and they are both undoubtedly A-List "stars" of the highest magnitude. I think the draw question needs to be more clearly defined in order to give specific answers, but those two always come to mind when I ponder this sort of question.

David Mumpower: When I think of box office draws, I envision the description as the types of people whom audiences are naturally inclined to give the benefit of the doubt. In addition to the names Kim mentioned, Adam Sandler is another obvious call. A good example by my definition, one I referenced recently, is Keanu Reeves. I believe his presence directly aids the box office of his projects. Meanwhile, I agree with the assessment that Brad Pitt misses badly as often as not, which makes him a poor qualifier; however, I disagree on Jolie. I see Changeling's $34.7 million as a remarkable showing for such a depressing subject matter and that follows on the heels of Wanted's mega-blockbuster success ($340 million worldwide). The other actor I am certain is overrated is Nic Cage, who seems hellbent on having a career as schizo as he is. Among women, I also believe Reese Witherspoon is again demonstrating she qualifies. Another odd choice is Matthew McConaughey, who has had success on five out of his last eight projects. That's a pretty good track record. Brendan Fraser is in that same boat and I would put Samuel Jackson in there if he could develop the ability to occasionally say no to a project. Shia LaBeouf is someone who isn't there yet, but he appears headed in that direction and the same could be said of James McAvoy, although I'm inclined to believe his is coincidence more than anything thus far.

The particularly interesting scenario in 2011 is what the world thinks of Daniel Radcliffe. Is he just Harry Potter or is he the A-List actor who has already starred in eight $200+ million movies by his 22nd birthday?

Scott Lumley: I'd say any list that tries to identify box office kings has to have Morgan Freeman on it. The American public would probably line up to hear that man read the Microsoft EULA. I'm willing to bet the March of the Penguins would never have had one tenth of the success it had if it had been narrated by Jack Black. We should probably give a nod to Christian Bale at this point and I'm pretty sure that Robert Downey Jr. should probably be on that list as well.

There are a couple of other names that jump out at me but they are all male. Matt Damon, George Clooney, Will Smith... Am I a chauvinist or am I just missing some obvious female talent?





Max Braden: I tend to think of leading actors in two categories: the ones who can get a movie into wide release without an effects-driven plot, and the box office draws who can open a movie at or over $25 million to $30 million with the chance at a $100 million gross. Pitt is one who hasn't been much of a draw without Danny Ocean, but I think that has a lot to do with the types of projects he's chosen, too. Nic Cage is conversely one I'd say has lucked out because of the projects he's been in. Ben Stiller and Kevin Costner I think are both reliable draws because they limit their range, so the product is familiar. I think Pitt's female counterpart in that regard is Charlize Theron, and Cage's is Cameron Diaz. The Stiller and Costner females might be Kate Hudson and Sandra Bullock. I think of Claire Danes as being on the cusp.

Radcliffe is likely to have the same fate as Maccaulay Culkin but that may suit Radcliffe because he seems to have more artistic taste.

Sean Collier: I'd agree with Clooney, but it's not automatic. If it weren't for Zack and Miri, I'd say that Seth Rogen was one of the most bankable young names, and I might say the same for Michael Cera. Angelina Jolie jumps to mind, but she has had a number of misses. Harrison Ford is almost always worth $100 million or more. If you had asked me ten years ago, I would've sworn by Robin Williams, but then...well, Death to Smoochy, The Night Listener, Man of the Year, and License to Wed, to name a few. I still think that he'll bounce back into instant money once he gets a new agent.

Continued:       1       2       3