Different Standards by cljohnston108

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

Different Standards

POSTED BY: CLJOHNSTON108
UPDATED: Monday, December 5, 2005 12:51
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1896
PAGE 1 of 1

Sunday, December 4, 2005 2:07 PM

Looking at My Yahoo! page, I see this headline...

Quote:
Theron's 'Flux' a box office failure - Yahoo! News
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051204/film_nm/leisure_boxoffice_dc

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Oscar-winning actress
Charlize Theron dropped her second box office bomb in two months on Sunday as her superhero saga "Aeon Flux" earned just $13.1 million during its first weekend, opening at No. 2.

Gee, that's 3 million more than Serenity opened with!
With $13.1 mil, we still wouldn't have beaten Flightplan's $14.8 mil, but, as it was, Box Office Mojo called us, "Neither hit nor flop".

Box Office Mojo > News > 'Serenity' Moseys to Tame Start
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=1910&p=.htm

Really burns me to see more attention being given to a vastly inferior movie (that wasn't even screened for the critics!) just because it's got a big-name star.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 4, 2005 2:51 PM

SEP7IMUS

Well, I asume that's because Aeon Flux had a larger budget... $62 Million. (Not that that's THAT big a difference...)

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 4, 2005 3:53 PM

DONCOAT

So, are you arguing that Serenity was a flop, or that Aeon Flux wasn't?

I imagine the difference is that AF had a "star" and therefore higher expectations, especially on opening weekend.

In terms of pure numbers, Serenity made a higher percentage of its budget (though the difference wasn't huge) and probably had a significantly lower budget for advertising and promotion.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't about you, Jayne. It's about what they need.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 5, 2005 3:33 AM

SEP7IMUS

Quote:
Originally posted by DonCoat:
So, are you arguing that Serenity was a flop, or that Aeon Flux wasn't?

I imagine the difference is that AF had a "star" and therefore higher expectations, especially on opening weekend.

In terms of pure numbers, Serenity made a higher percentage of its budget (though the difference wasn't huge) and probably had a significantly lower budget for advertising and promotion.

Right... so I'm arguing that Aeon Flux was a flop and Serenity wasn't. Of course!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 5, 2005 4:14 AM

DONCOAT

Quote:
Originally posted by Sep7imus:
I'm arguing that Aeon Flux was a flop and Serenity wasn't. Of course!

Yes yes. I was actually addressing my question to the original poster, but I see that wasn't clear. Sorry for the confusion.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't about you, Jayne. It's about what they need.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 5, 2005 6:10 AM

CLJOHNSTON108

Quote:
Originally posted by DonCoat:
Quote:
Originally posted by Sep7imus:
I'm arguing that Aeon Flux was a flop and Serenity wasn't. Of course!
Yes yes. I was actually addressing my question to the original poster, but I see that wasn't clear. Sorry for the confusion.

Oh, it was clear to me.

I started to reply to Sep7imus' post with:

"I think DonCoat was more bewildered as to the point of my original post."

I've been sitting here for the better part of an hour trying to better clarify my reasons for bothering y'all with this.
Failing that, I realize I'm just frustrated (and now confused).

It's just that I for one would've been quite happy to see Serenity get an extra $3 mil on opening weekend.

I still don't get it: Critics LOVED our movie (which Joss was PROUD to screen for them)...
http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/serenity
...it had such fantastic word-of-mouth, but yet... it had no big names in the cast, so nobody went to see it?

Maybe it's just me, but I'll pay to see a movie that I hear is well-made and well-acted, even if I've never heard any of the names involved, because I love to come out of a theater with that smile that accompanies the knowledge that I'm going to be hearing those names a lot more in the future!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 5, 2005 7:10 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Maybe it's just me, but I'll pay to see a movie that I hear is well-made and well-acted, even if I've never heard any of the names involved, because I love to come out of a theater with that smile that accompanies the knowledge that I'm going to be hearing those names a lot more in the future!

Maybe people today are more willing to pay for tickets+popcorn+drink+etc... on movies w/ names they recognize instead of lesser known ones. Much like the Top40 syndrome in music.... " hey, if it's in the top 40, it has to be good, right?

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 5, 2005 7:43 AM

CLJOHNSTON108

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Maybe people today are more willing to pay for tickets+popcorn+drink+etc... on movies w/ names they recognize instead of lesser known ones.

Y'know, it's been at least 15 years since I've bought refreshments at the movies.
Gave it up cuz it was too distracting.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 5, 2005 8:32 AM

NIKNAK

Quote:
Originally posted by cljohnston108:

Maybe it's just me, but I'll pay to see a movie that I hear is well-made and well-acted, even if I've never heard any of the names involved, because I love to come out of a theater with that smile that accompanies the knowledge that I'm going to be hearing those names a lot more in the future!

The problem is that you don't know that a movie is good until you've seen it. If we didn't know anything about Joss or our BDHs then we wouldn't have known that Serenity was worth paying money to see. We all saw Serenity because we liked the previous work of those involved - which is exactly why people go to see crap movies by big name actors. They don't know that it is crap until they have seen it.

In the end the marketing is probably more important than the quality because you don't know how good a film is until you've paid to see it. A big name is part of that.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 5, 2005 11:06 AM

CLJOHNSTON108

Certainly there have been exceptions?

I'm fairly certain there've been successful films without Big Name stars...

Weren't Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford & Carrie Fisher unknowns before 1977?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 5, 2005 12:51 PM

KHYRON

It's not so good if you consider that it's the holiday season. Serenity opened at pretty much one of the worst times of year (post-summer, pre-Christmas lull) and did only $3million worse than a much-hyped movie with a big name opening during the holiday season. So yeah... Serenity did well (relatively speaking), and Flux is busy flopping.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE