website tracking

Search The Big Picture


« Trailer - 'Facing Ali' | Main | Two More Get Sucker Punched by Zack Snyder »
Tuesday
21Apr2009

Should Jason Statham Get Another Action Franchise?

DateTuesday, April 21, 2009 at 5:02PM
It was announced by Production Weekly today that Jason Statham will star in Simon West's remake of The Mechanic, a 1972 Charles Bronson action thrilla. Whether or not Production Weekly is correct in this instance isn't the issue, even though they've been wrong about tons of casting and directing news over the past six or eight months.

But it's interesting to me that Jason Statham is still landing big roles. It's not just that Crank 2 might make $15 million in the U.S., which is far from being a hit for a movie with its budget and marketing expenses, but it's the prevalent pattern of his career. Unless you count The Italian Job, he's never had a $100 million movie. And you shouldn't count it, because he was at best the fifth most important character in the movie.

The second Transporter made the most money in America, about $45 million, but his average box office performance over the past decade is $23 million with $9 million opening weekends. Usually, opening weekends account for a third of the overall box office, so the fact that his movies don't hit that mark indicates that they're almost entirely driven by a pretty small core audience that never expands.

But what it really tells us is that Statham is not a big draw, even with sequels, but he's also been slowly losing his audience over the past couple of years. Since Transporter 2, Statham has never had an opening weekend of more than $13 million, even the wide releases like Crank 2.

We poked fun at Universal Soldier earlier today, but that movie has outgrossed all but one Jason Statham movie...and it's nearly 20 years old.

So how does a fairly limited actor who has yet to headline a movie that has resonated with even a good percentage of film audiences continue to land leading roles in very similar projects? If these were really low budget B-movies, then that would be great. But there's too much advertising for them to believe that's the case with Statham's movies. After all, he ranked #24 on IMDB's StarMeter for 2008. So shouldn't the performance match the hype? Or even come close?

Maybe he should play a comedic heavy in a supporting role and change gears for a while. I don't believe audiences are all that interested in man-of-action brand he's built. The Bank Job, which is his best movie but not at all like a Transporter or Crank, is the only film that managed to show legs at the box office.

He should take a clue from history and change what he's doing.

AuthorColin Boyd | | in , , | Print ArticlePrint Article | | Comment5 Comments |

Reader Comments (5)

I agree, I feel that he should take a break, lest he become Steven Seagal and make straight-to-dvd trash or just the butt of every joke. Not gonna lie, I do enjoy his films (saw "Transporter 3", "Crank 2" and "The Bank Job" all in theaters and enjoyed them to varying degrees), but his fans aren't showing up. He's already been typecasted, but I'd love for him to try something else- "The Bank Job" worked because he was a likeable character, just a cool guy who is able to kick ass, not a superhero/action dude who is able to flip his Audi 360 degrees in the air. Jason Statham has potential to be more than a B-movie action star, but he's not acting on it.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterVince

Actually Transporter 3 made $100 million and Crank 2's opening weekend is bigger than The Bank Job's.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterDude

Well may be The Expendables will go over $100 million

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterMr.K

Transporter 3 made over $100 million worldwide, but that's not what we're talking about, because some movies play in dozens of foreign markets and others, like the recent Observe and Report, will only hit theaters in a handful of territories. So, it's hard to look at international receipts as a litmus for Hollywood greenlighting movies. Or at least, for greenlighting every movie. It's a completely different scale.

In the case of Transporter 3, its $69 million in foreign receipts is spread over 41 territories around the world, so that's less than $1.5 million per. Not very good, especially if there was any advertising at all for the movie in those countries.

The Bank Job also opened in 600 fewer theaters than Crank 2, and is not one of these big, balls-to-the-wall action movies like Transporter or Crank. $100 million for The Expendables could happen, but it wouldn't just be because of Statham. I don't think it has that kind of potential, though. Probably $70 million or so in the U.S.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 | Registered CommenterColin Boyd

To the other posters, Comparing "The Bank Job" to something like "Crank" is comparing apples to oranges- one's a drama/thriller inspired by true events, and the other's a completely unrealistic, hyper & ridiculous action flick; it's like trying to compare "Valkyrie" to "Inglourious Basterds"- both are about "killin' Nazi's" but that's where the similarities (and the audience overlap) ends.

I love Jason Statham, but just like another guy with a super dedicated but small audience (Kevin Smith), his films rarely break out of their niche.

Oh, and $100 million for "The Expendables" is not very likely. Maybe w/ foreign receipts it'll cross the mark, but I think that the film will play out like "Rambo" from last year at best.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterVince

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>