Image Credit: Barry WetcherThis weekend, children ruled at the box office, as they so often do. Alice in Wonderland continued to prove that its boisterous, overstuffed, clattery fairy-tale landscape is a giant hit with audiences, and Diary of a Wimpy Kid, with a very impressive opening, made good on its feisty promise of a socially awkward, quick-brained nerd’s dreams of acceptance. Right now, though, I’d like to take note of a few of the other stories that the box office told this weekend. Stories that aren’t necessarily pretty, but that take the temperature of today’s moviegoers in revealing, and even fascinating, ways. So here goes:
If you build a bad romantic comedy, they will come (sort of). We’re obsessed in this culture with “winners” and “losers,” so the big news about The Bounty Hunter is that it was “beaten” by Diary of a Wimpy Kid (i.e., it happened to make four-fifths of a million dollars less). To me, however, the real news is that another cookie-cutter synthetic-screwball dud, with the charming Jennifer Aniston being abused by the charmless Gerard Butler, the two of them skulking through the rituals of romcom banter like grim soldiers being put through a drill, managed to withstand a fusilade of lousy reviews to do — big surprise — just fine in the marketplace. The point? That when moviegoers, like so many of you on this site, complain, “Why can’t the studios make a romantic comedy that isn’t a borderline insult?” the answer is: “Because the romantic comedies that are insults have no trouble finding an audience.” That said, I do buy the argument (or, at least, I would like to believe) that if The Bounty Hunter had actually been a good movie, it might have done even more business. Does anyone remember Jennifer Aniston’s very first romantic comedy, Picture Perfect (co-starring Jay Mohr), from 1997? It was terrific! I’ve been waiting for her to make a romantic comedy that good ever since, but if The Bounty Hunter holds on (which, of course, it may not), she’ll have that much less motivation to break out of the ghetto of ersatz chemistry and plastic squabbling.
In movies, rock & roll may be sexy, but it’s so not money. This weekend, there were a lot of hopes pinned on The Runaways, and not just because it co-stars a certain actress from a certain popular downbeat Harlequin vampire saga. Dakota Fanning has a fan base too, and the subject matter itself seemed cool enough to be regarded as solidly marketplace-friendly. But The Runaways, let’s not mince words, was a major disappointment, a big mainstream bomb, a total non-event. Yes, it opened on just 244 screens (which may have been a mistake), but its per-screen average of $3,291 was low enough to express an audience sentiment that can be summed up in one word: indifference. What was the problem? I think it comes down to this. Just about everyone I encountered who saw this movie, wanted to see it, or posted a positive message about it had a significant thing in common: They had fond memories of the Runaways. And if you have fond memories of the Runaways, then there’s one thing that can definitively be said about you: You are old! The Runaways rocked out about a million years ago. (In addition, at least to me, they really did have only one good song.) They are, in essence, a novelty act from an ancient time, which is why I can absolutely believe that the target audience for this film — girls who like Kristen Stewart and Dakota Fanning — couldn’t have cared less about it.
What Oscar bump? Last weekend, March 12-14, was the first weekend after the Academy Awards. Two of the movies that won big, The Hurt Locker and Crazy Heart, were both in theaters. (The Hurt Locker, though already out on DVD, was re-released on about 300 screens in the weeks leading up to the awards.) So you might guess that each of them would have benefited at least a little bit from those monumentally coveted, high-profile victories. Not a chance: The Hurt Locker, last weekend, enjoyed a per-screen average of just $2,372, and Crazy Heart, on 1,361 screens, had an even lower average: $2,208. This weekend, those already low numbers were cut in half. I think these numbers are particularly striking in the case of Crazy Heart, which isn’t out on DVD and had just started to fan out to theaters across the country. It may be no exaggeration to say that five days after it happened, Jeff Bridges’ big Oscar triumph barely sold one ticket to Crazy Heart. The fabled “Oscar bump” hasn’t completely gone away, of course. It’s there, most prominently, in DVD sales and rentals. The Hurt Locker will surely do much more business now than it would have done without its Oscar juggernaut. Still, the lack of passion to go see these movies in theaters, even right after they won those awards, is sobering. It’s a sign of how the game in Hollywood, and among audiences, has changed, and not necessarily for the better.
First
congrats- youre a loser
haha
and you’re a jerk
If you’re not first, you’re last. That’s you, Paige…last.
I’m going to have to side with Paige on this one.
who cares whose first…and jessica, you make no sense.
Mark…I think she’s referencing Talledega Nights.
These first 6 comments made my day.
I’m a book and I ate all the paiges.
Oh, I love a good book.
Owen-i have to disagree with you. The Runaways should’ve been opened in 3 theaters and platform released. They would’ve seen much better results.
it’s not for a lack of interest, but a lack of competent marketing and distribution.
Unfortunately, it seems to me like a big part of the appeal of mainstream romantic comedies these days is precisely that they’re bad! More specifically, the target audience seems happy to accept that they’re total junk.
The only thing that seems to matter is that the girl ends up with the guy, no matter how little sense it makes.
It’d also be nice if a few of these so-called “romantic comedies” were actually romantic or funny.
I think you’re right – so many times I hear people say “oh, I just wanted some mindless entertainment” and that’s exactly what they get.
Not trying to offend anyone here, but Americans settling for junk is also the reason why there are so many overweight people in America. Junk food + Junk entertainment = stupid fat people
The Proposal is good, and it earned a lot of money.
The movie I’m most interested in has got little print: “The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo.” I can’t WAIT to see this Swedish movie based on Stieg Larsson’s first book of the Millennium series. It’s received rave reviews and looks amazing. It did good Box Office in just a few theaters this weekend. I hafta wait 2 more weeks until it comes to my town. Anyway, for me, that’s the most interesting Box Office story nobody’s writing.
“hafta”? has the English language slumped to such poor levels?
I saw that movie yesterday Lily and it was FANTASTIC! Really did the book justice. Can’t wait for the other two to come to the US.
all you care about is money
Thanks for letting me know llevinso. I can’t wait to see it. I LOVED all 3 books. Couldn’t put them down.
Lily, I sooooo agree with you.
Sally in chicago, I’m wondering why someone criticizing another’s use of slang doesn’t know that city names are capitalized in the English language. Or is “chicago” obscure slang?
Yes, my command of the English language has slumped low enough to intentionally type “sooooo” intead of “so.”
Ceballos, I believe the American Medical Association has identified that as “Twilight Syndrome.” Symptoms include hyperactive behavior, inappropriate crushes on teenage boys, and unexplained weight gain.
See, but at least “Twilight” has the built-in fanbase for the books – what possible excuse is there for “The Bounty Hunter” making money other than, “We’re going to the movies on a date, and it’s the only mainstream romantic comedy out right now”?
People with “Twilight Syndrome” have enough issues without us piling on by saying they also like crappy rom-coms.
I assumed it was the same audience… but you do make a good point about The Bounty Hunter.
Awesome! Crispy is here…
My theory is a bunch of dumb guys went to see it thinking it was some action flick.
It IS the exact same audience. Every single female I know who also likes twilight wanted to see The Bounty Hunter. It’s the EXACT same females minus the 12 year old girls who are not old enough to see Bounty Hunter.
Ceballos, I think you hit the nail on the head. I went and saw that awful “when in rome” specifically because my wife wanted a “brainless comedy”. The movie was dreadfully cliched and didn’t even take place in Rome! The whole movie was just another “we love NYC’s tax break for filmmakers” POS romantic comedy.
The movie didn’t even have ONE romantic Vespa scene. Italy+Romantic Comedy usually= a hot Vespa ride or love scene.
Anyway, you are right. People don’t want smart or well made romantic comedies. They want cookie cutter flicks with minor laughs and oddball dudes who have no chance of landing the hot “girl next door”.
I missed “When in Rome” (darn!) but I do believe it’s actually a crime to set a movie in Italy and not have a scene with a Vespa.
I’m curious though – did your wife actually think “When in Rome” was good? The reason I ask is because it’s not like I myself am opposed to seeing something I know is junk. (A horror movie here, an erotic thriller from the mid-90′s there.) However, I’m fully aware that these movies are indefensible junk.
The women I’m around (as I whip out my sexist broad brush) seem to enjoy this junk AND want to defend it as actually being somehow good. (Or maybe I’m still scarred from catching so much s— after I slammed “He’s Just Not that Into You.”)
If the movie is neither romantic nor funny…why is it called a romantic comedy? Am I the only one who thinks movies like The Ugly truth and The Bounty Hunter need an entirely new category? Suggestions are welcome
For anyone wondering how this type of movie is still successful, I know when I was in highschool a few years ago, my friends and I would see almost every romcom that came out (including the awful Maid in Manhattan). Not out of any particular desire to see it, but because we had disposable money and not many options of things to do. I imagine this is where alot of the romcom success comes from. The boys did the same thing, seeing multiple movies each month, but action movies instead of romcom’s (hence the success of Transformers and GI Joe).
ITA that “people don’t want smart or well made romantic comedies”. If they did, then the brilliant “(500) Days of Summer” would have been a huge box office hit, instead of just a critical darling and newest cult fave.
I am a fan of rom-coms but this (Bounty Hunter) just looked awful to me, so it won’t be getting my money. I guess I don’t fall into the category that this article is talking about because I do like movies just for entertainment sake (but I also like really thought-provoking stuff as well) but I won’t waste money on dreck most of the time. Probably why I haven’t seen a rom-com in theaters in a while. I wait til its on HBO. I don’t know why the ones they’ve been pushing out lately have seemed soooo awful. Though I did really like The Proposal.
“These days”? Ceballos, when has it ever been different? Ever since movies came into existence romantic comedies have been silly stories where the guy and girl end up together. NOTHING has changed, only these movies are too new to be considered classics. We just need to wait and see which movies stand the test of time. Honestly, the same basic formula has been recycled since the 1930s. It has nothing to do with this decade or generation.
That said, I think people pay to see these movies to escape. People don’t care if it’s cliched or unrealistic, they want the illusion of love and happiness. For example, I saw the movie Repo Men this weekend. Nothing new was shown, nothing remarkable or Oscar worthy, but I enjoyed being able to sit down for two hours and have fun.
Look, I hate to be the old fogey who yells at kids to get off his lawn and goes on and on about how things were better “back in my day.”
I get your point that romantic comedies have always been mostly fluff, but you can’t tell me that there wasn’t a higher ratio of artful, thoughtful, well-produced fluff even a few decades ago than what we’re getting now. (Where’s today’s John Hughes, for example?) You make some good points, but I just don’t think that stuff like “When in Rome” or “The Bounty Hunter” are going to be considered classics, no matter how many decades go by. The best we can hope for these days are “The Proposal”s of the world when we’re like, “Huh, that was actually pretty ok.”
You say that the quality of films “has nothing to do with this decade or this genertion” and I almost agree with you. I would say the biggest difference between today and past generations is actually the sheer amount of movies released these days – three or sometimes four every single weekend. “Back in my day” that simply wasn’t the case. My point is since there are SO many more movies being released these days, you’re going to get a considerably higher amount of clunkers. Since romantic comedies have a built-in formula and are relatively easy to produce, we’re going to get a higher amount of those kinds of (crappy) flicks.
Like I said, you make some good points, but I can’t agree with you that NOTHING has changed.
very interesting article, i def agree the marketplace is changing and the window till DVD release is gonna have to shrink like AIW just proved. it seems that people only go to event films for the spectacle now and then wait for the smaller films to watch at home. my idea would be to offer the movie to buy as your EXITING the theatre just to build word of mouth.
First of all, Picture Perfect was as cookie cutter as they come. It might be ok as a DVD rental on a night when everything else is picked over, but it is not a good movie, much less “terrific.”
I wanted to go see Crazy Heart after Jeff Bridges won, but it’s not playing in my, pretty big, city. To get an oscar bump, the movie has to be playing on plenty of screens.
I agree, Picture Picture really wasn’t that great.
Yes, in that movie, Jen’s character was either a junior art director or copywriter at an ad agency and then was overnight promoted to creative director AND account executive (which makes no sense and would never happen).
Picture Perfect was quite boring in fact. Along Came Polly was much better, and funny!
After The Ugly Truth and now this awful rom/com, I think Gerard Butler should go back to his 300 genre. I don’t like comedies where the man is a pig – what happened to the Richard Gere’s of the world?? Jennifer Anniston best step up her game or she will be an afterthought for rom/coms in the future.
Actually, Gerard Butler was quite good in “Dear Frankie”. Granted it’s not a romantic comedy, but his character was quite endearing. I just don’t think he’s picking his projects well.
Agreed.
I completely agree with Jackie. “Dear Frankie” was a sweet and mature movie that showed off Butler’s talents well. He was also really good in the BBC miniseries “The Jury.” Sadly, he now seems to just veer between bad rom-coms and unimpressive action flicks like “Gamer” and “Law Abiding Citizen.” I wish he could get an agent who could steer him toward more emotionally challenging work.
There’s a little known Gerard Butler movie that I loved called “Timeline.” I also thought he was great in P.S. I Love You & 300. He’s filming “Corialanus” and preparing “Burns” about the life of Scottish poet Robert Burns, so those will be challenging for him. I look forward to those.
Dear Frankie! I almost forgot he was in that movie.. really really good. Which reminds me, that one kiss in the movie was super romantic. Why can’t he make good films?
To busy sticking gerbals up their butts…
1. Yes, by all means refer to an stupid, erroneous rumor from the 80s.
2. Learn to spell: it’s gerbils.
a – not an
Richard Gere, or Tom Hanks. I used to really like romantic comedies. Haven’t seen a new one in quite a while because they look so awful. Although – Gere and Roberts made Runaway Bride, and Tom Hanks/Meg Ryan were scraping bottom in You’ve Got Mail, where the men were pigs (sorry to pigs for that) and then she falls in love with the guy who put her out of business? Please. Not even those two could overcome that. – I liked Gerard Butler in P.S. I Love You – not the greatest movie, but I thought it was sweet. And he was fantastic in Dear Frankie (not a comedy, but a wonderful, wonderful movie). He does have charm and has the ability to play a complex character and a good guy. The poor choices lately baffle me. These people don’t seem to care about what they’re doing.
Oops – others beat me to mentioning Dear Frankie. It is fantastic.
mags- your last sentence goes against the point of the article. This movie made money at the box office even though it sucks. The writer is saying she probably wont step up her “game” because of the numbers bad movies like this put up.
Seriously, what has happened to Jennifer Aniston’s choice in movies? I used to really like her stuff but lately she just picks to star in crap. I will say her upcoming movie The Switch seems interesting but I think I’m only into that because of Jason Bateman who I’ll watch in almost anything. He’s hilarious.
Yeah, I think you’re mistaking the first glimmer that Jennifer Aniston could be a movie star for a good movie – Picture Perfect is beyond generic, and I swear EW panned it when it was released. Maybe it speaks more about many of Aniston’s bad choices since then that it looks good in hindsight.
Can this not be a BIG SIGN to Jennifer Aniston and her agent that she needs to go back to her strength, TV. She is not a movie actress, she’s not even a good romcom actress (yet she’s currently filming ANOTHER ONE..argg!). Hollywood wake-up, she’s 41 and her romcom days are ovah!!
Her and her agent are laughing all the way to the bank. Did you not read what the article says? The movie sucks but still made 21 million opening weekend. As far as RomComs go that is a good number. So she will do a few more bad romcoms til America smartens up.
What does age have to do with this? So you cant be older then 40 to do a good Rom/Com? Thats absurd and insulting.
Hey jillyro – Sandra Bullock made a swell rom/com with The Proposal at age 45. (It helped to have Ryan Reynolds!) But agree with you about Jen Aninston returning to TV. That’s her strength. Don’t think “movie star” is her thing. Lucille Ball tried to be a movie star and couldn’t make it as that, but then struck gold with I Love Lucy. I think the same could be true for Aniston if she developed a smart, funny TV show she could rule TV.
Picture Perfect was awful – maybe Owen needs to re-screen it. I think Object of My Affection was quite good, however.
Picture Perfect is the kind of movie you can watch on tv over and over again and it’s fine. Not a classic or anything, but something you catch when you’re home from work sick and it’s enjoyable.
The Object of My Affection, that was really good. Very true.
Your answer lifts the inetlgliecne of the debate.
Jennifer just can’t act her way out of a wet paper bag
Yeah, she keeps playing the same character with ever movie. She needs to find a character with some depth, like in “The Good Girl”.
Her southern accent was terrible in that movie. I could barely get through it.
Even in “The Good Girl” she wasn’t very special. Just about any actress could have stepped into that role and did what she did.
WHAT Locker??? Nobody cares!!! No one will remember it won the Oscar a few years from now. The wrong movie won it.
If you say Avatar deserved it, I’ll kick you in the teeth! It shouldn’t have even been nominated. Infact, Kevin Costner should sue James Cameron for stealing sooooo much from Dances With Wolves. Also, the makers of Ferngully should sue Cameron as well.
Don’t forget about Pocahontas.
Dances with Wolves is nothing like Avatar with the exception of a couple of things. That whole concept has been used numerous times. I doubt Dances With Wolves was the first and I thoroughly doubt Avatar will be the last to use it.
And Dances With Wolves ripped off A Man Called Horse. And I am sure it was hardly the first movie with that plot
Why do you automatically assume that if the poster dislike The Hurt Locker he liked Avatar? Maybe he didn’t like either of them.
Well, if he’s talking about Inglorious Basterds or District 9 than I’d agree with him. But I have a feeling he’s talking about Avatar.
Get over Avatar’s loss. The no frills DVD will be out in April so all you fan boys can watch it over & over again. Then come December, you can shell out more money for the thief’s (oops, I meant the Director’s cut) of the film.
This weekend my mom was watching The Ugly Truth on cable and I couldn’t understand how she could possible sit through it … let alone multiple times! It was painful. I’ve decided to stop buying romcoms on dvd because I never actually even watch them! While I really liked them, I only find myself watching them when they are on tv and there is nothing else to watch.
Anyway, this weekend my boyfriend and I went to see Shutter Island, which was amazing and we loved it. We wanted to see another movie but there wasn’t really anything we were interested in. We thought about Crazy Heart and we thought about The Runaways (he did NOT want to see that) and we thought briefly about The Bounty Hunter but I don’t like Jennifer Aniston. I think she plays only one character and I don’t like that character.
Yay! I loved Shutter Island too! I’d definitely recommend it to anyone.
Since Gerald Butler is Scottish, why did he have to use a laughable American accent. It’s a Rom/Com, foreign accents instantly raise likability factor in male characters.
My guess is that the producers didn’t trust Americans to be able to understand his rather-thick accent. I laugh whenever I see programs where perfectly understandable non-Americans are subtitled only because they have an accent.
I don’t laugh at that. It annoys me so much. But yeah, you’re totally right. It also annoys me how Asian Americans always have an accent in movies.
Oh god, I think I’m going to cry, because you are absolutely right about everything you said and it makes me feel depressive about the future of movie making… once again.
See The Good Girl and Friends with Money- JA can act, but tends to do this easy sleepwalking style cuteness in crappy rom coms. I have to admit, generic though it may be, I did sort of like Picture Perfect.
Jennifer Aniston can’t open a movie, let alone sustain our interest for 2 hours without the help of an appealing co-star (which is not Gerard B). Sheesh, I wish movie execs would stop casting her when it’s obvious to the public she’s not movie star material.
Unfortunately she has more rom-coms coming up: The Switch with Jason Bateman and Just Go With It with Adam Sandler, so clearly the execs still haven’t gotten the picture.
Am I the only one who wants to rip Jennifer’s hair off her hair??? She wears the same hairdo in EVERY MOVIE!!! The hairdo she has in real life!!! I love the critic on rotten tomatoe who says “flicking and touching your hair Jennifer is NOT acting”. She needs to give up the romcoms and make way for much more appealing and talented actresses in this genre.
Jen sell magazines, hair products, and cosmetics to now 40-something women still stuck in the 90′s.
Her movies sell her looks etc, etc.. Eventually her ‘some day my Prince will come’ act will be ‘unsellable’.
I, too, LOVED Picture Perfect, but how much money did that make? I also loved Object of My Affection, how much money did that make? I enjoy most of JenAn’s movies. Most people are way too angry at her for making enjoyable romantic comedies. Not every movie is or needs to be The Godfather.
I enjoyed those two films too. Also, The Good Girl. And probably because Jennifer wasn’t doing farcical, forced funny comedy. Jennifer is not a slapstick actress. She needs to stay away from that ganre of film. She was funny on Friends because she was playing vulnerable…and that’s what she does best. More ‘Good Girl’…less ‘Bounty Hunter’.