Wall Street Not Kind to Lionsgate

Some interesting reading about the future of Lionsgate after back to back dull thuds at the box office. First, Punisher: War Zone tanked and was unceremoniously pulled from theaters after only three weeks and $8 million earned. Then came The Spirit, which opened to resoundingly negative reviews and had only made $12 million through its first six days. On Tuesday, analysts from the investment bank Caris & Co. painted a less-than-rosy picture for Lionsgate, downgraded the stock to "above average" from "buy." Said the company's David Miller in a message to his clients, "Explanation for the weakness came primarily from a smattering of negative reviews, coupled with heavy competition from Marley & Me, which opened with a stellar $37.0 million in gross receipts." Miller said that a lot is riding on the studio's next major release, My Bloody Valentine 3-D. If it's a dud, the studio would suffer a third major shelacking in less than 60 days. And if you look at 2008, both as a production company and a distributor, Lionsgate had a less-than-distinguised output. Really only Saw V, Religulous, and Rambo could be deemed "hits," with nearly a dozen movies that had very mediocre to poor box office performance. I wouldn't say the company is doomed or anything - they still have the Tyler Perry and Saw franchises, plus they don't pour a lot into projects as a general rule - but it could be telling that Wall Street is giving investors this kind of notice.

The Biggest Flops of 2008

We all know 2008 was a bad year economically. You don't have to look very far or watch the news for very long to see the repercussions of the worst financial and employment market in at least 30 years, and possibly 80 years.

For the most part, movies retained their success seen in previous years. Why is that? It's still a relatively cheap night out, even if you're talking about a family of four hitting a matinee. It's also one of the few things you can't get anywhere else. You don't have to eat out at a restaurant, you can watch the baseball games on TV. But if you wanted to see The Dark Knight, that meant for most of you paying $10 or so to watch it in theaters this summer. Another reason for the success of films overall is that the studios have such specific marketing for them now that they target the people most likely to see that film over another. That can't be the only measuring stick, and in fact, quality was a big factor this year. At least six of the top ten films of the year got great reviews, and the only movie that wasn't critically acclaimed that really even needed good press was Hancock. The others - Indy Jones, Madagascar, and Twilight - all had built-in fan bases, and you could really only argue that Twilight was a bad movie, although I'm not sure I'd go that far. The point is, audiences responded to really good films this year and avoided some junk. But how do we know what's a hit? It's not as easy as just making more money than your movie cost. These are never completely isolated things. A studio or producer could make $40 million on one movie but lose $60 million on another, or a movie with an A-list star and A-list director could have to split a lot of the profits because of contractual incentives, or the marketing could be irresponsibly pricy. A good example of weird movie math came this summer when Jeff Rubinov - whose studio, Warner Bros., is the big winner in 2008 - said that the company was a little disappointed in the performance of Get Smart. Just so we know what we're dealing with here, Get Smart cost about $80 million plus marketing and advertising and all of that stuff, and in the U.S., it made back its money. The movie earned $130 million here at home, plus another $100 million internationally. You'd think an $80 million movie that rang up nearly a quarter of a billion dollars worth of business before DVD and cable kicks in would be a smash. Now, it doesn't work that way for every movie, but it's worth thinking about; how high were the expectations for Get Smart if it fails to meet those expectations at $230 million? Wouldn't expectations be just as high on some of these other films? Some of those figures are easy: Australia is a bomb. It cost at least $130 million and it won't make that much even with the international box office. Considering all the little add-ons, like marketing and distribution costs, Fox spent more on that movie than it can make back. DVD changes those figures significatly, but it's not exactly free to make and promote DVDs, either.

Click to read more ...

Box Office - Tryptophan Causes 50% Drop in Ticket Sales

The weekend box office was really below par as December kicked off. Punisher: War Zone, the weekend's biggest release, only made $4 million, winding up with an eighth-place debut. Ouch. The rest of the top ten, therefore, looks suspiciously like it did the previous weekend, only with smaller numbers. For example, the entire top ten only generated $73 million from Friday to Sunday, and just two weeks ago, Twilight did just under $70 million all on its own. It looks like some studio somewhere missed a golden opportunity to open big this weekend. Four Christmases repeated as the top film in the land, with Twilight and Bolt rounding out the top three. Australia had its last hurrah, earning $7 million, which was good enough for fifth place. It's about a 50% drop from its opening weekend, and because it's only made $30 million in the U.S., the prospects are not good. Baz Luhrmann's pet project was tremendously expensive, and it's unlikely that it can make the kind of money on the international stage that it would need to turn a profit. So, it's on to the DVD market for that one. Quantum of Solace finished the weekend in fourth place, but has slowed down a bit over the past two weeks, and looks less likely to become the first 007 movie to cross $200 million in U.S. ticket sales. It should still get to $175 million without too much trouble, but Casino Royale definitely had a stronger run after its opening weekend. This weekend was particularly bad, as the film lost 65% of its crowd from the previous weekend. If you compare them head-to-head, Casino Royale actually made more money than Quantum of Solace in its fourth stanza - in fewer theaters. The Top Five:1 - Four Christmases ($18.2 million)
2 - Twilight ($13.2 million)
3 - Bolt ($10 million)
4 - Australia ($7 million)
5 - Quantum of Solace ($6.6 million)

Box Office - 'Australia,' 'Punisher' Becoming Holiday Bombs

The big story at the box office right now isn't what's on top, but rather what's stinking up the joint. Four Christmases will win its second straight weekend and Twilight will finish in second place - look for them to make about $19 million and $14 million respectively - but Australia and the new release Punisher: War Zone simply aren't finding audiences.Australia, the new Baz Luhrmann epic, opened over the Thanksgiving weekend and in its first ten days has only made $26 million. For a movie with a price tag over $125 million, that's a terrible showing. At best, it can hope to recoup about one-third of its budget with U.S. receipts. On Friday, Australia made $2.4 million, according to Box Office Mojo estimates, which was good enough for fourth place, but the trend is not good for the expensive, expansive period piece.Punisher: War Zone, which obviously has a much smaller budget, nonetheless can't be considered a success early on, finishing Friday in sixth place, despite being the only new release in over 1,000 theaters. With its paltry $1.6 million opening day, Punisher might make $5 million this weekend, $7 million if it's really lucky. That would indicate an overall gross in the $15 - $20 million range, which clearly isn't enough to keep the franchise going.On the other end of things, Quantum of Solace will be over $150 million by Sunday night, and Twilight might make it to $140 million. We'll have complete weekend numbers tomorrow.

Movie Review - 'Punisher: War Zone'

Punisher: War Zone Starring Ray Stevenson, Dominic West, and Julie Benz Directed by Lexi Alexander Rated R

It’s difficult to say if Punisher: War Zone is the worst superhero movie ever made –back before they were in vogue, these movies were almost always bad – but it’s easy to recognize that this is the worst Punisher movie so far. Yes, even Dolph Lundgren had more to work with when the anti-hero hit the big screen in 1989. Marvel movies carry with them a certain expectation these days, and while the 2004 Punisher didn’t meet them from a commercial standpoint, it was different enough to at least be worth exploring. That’s not the case here; Punisher: War Zone is just a bloody mess loaded with gunshots, uninteresting action, and some of the year’s worst dialogue. To that end, in the interest of full disclosure, I should report that I'm one of those film critics that does not take notes. Many of them do, but I never have. I figure if it's not something I can remember, it must not be worth remembering. But a few of the lines in this movie were so atrociously stupid, I wouldn't have needed to write them down anyway. Enjoy the knowledge that someone got paid to write this:Sitting in a church with a preacher (who, apparently, the Punisher knows, but since it's the only 40 seconds he's on screen, we can't be sure what the hell he has to do with anything), the Punisher lashes out at the landlord, "Sometimes I'd like to get my hands on God," he threatens through gritted teeth.Then there is the scene in which the Punisher happens upon a confidante who has roughly a dozen axe wounds in his body, as well as an axe sticking out of his chest. We can assume for the moment that it's the axe that did all the damage. "Don't you die on me," commands the Punisher to the obviously dying man. "See you in hell" responds the confidante. "If I see you anywhere near hell, I'll kick your ass outta there," insists our hero.Here's the curious part about that scene: The Punisher didn't even like that character at first, and since they only briefly cross paths one other time in the movie, I have no idea when he changed his mind.But enough about that; you get the point.

Click to read more ...