THE RHYTHM SECTION | January 31, 2020 | Paramount | Blake Lively

[TLK]

The era of actors being draws on their own is over. Either they need to pick an IP or pick good projects with good directors. Blake Lively needs to pick better projects and she'll be fine. 

[TalismanRing]

28 minutes ago, TLK said:

The era of actors being draws on their own is over. Either they need to pick an IP or pick good projects with good directors. Blake Lively needs to pick better projects and she'll be fine. 

That era never existed.  It's always been a marriage of actor and project (a combination of genre, director, producer, writer, tone, co-stars, quality etc).   It's less than it used to be (with IP now king) but it still exists - and studios know it exists which is why they pay stars more, and they pay different salaries for different kinds of projects.

 

Edited January 31, 2020 by TalismanRing

[TLK]

6 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

That era never existed.  It's always been a marriage of actor and project (a combination of genre, director, producer, writer, tone, co-stars, quality etc).   It's less than it used to be (with IP now king) but it still exists - and studios know it exists which is why they pay stars more, and they pay different salaries for different kinds of projects.

 

 

There was a time back in the 80s and 90s when a handful of actors would carry anything. I mean Kindergarten Cop did $200 million Worldwide 30 years ago.

[Barnack]

14 minutes ago, TLK said:

There was a time back in the 80s and 90s when a handful of actors would carry anything. I mean Kindergarten Cop did $200 million Worldwide 30 years ago.

And it was fully type cast and more than having Arnold in it (or Read Heat- Running Man would have made as much), Prime Arnold was solid but he really could not have carried everything like peak Will Smith could.

 

Look at prime Sylvester Stallone or Julia Roberts, incredible good, but Stallone was batting about 50% at best outside is 2 franchise and Roberts could still go wide and open under $6M and under 15M dom total https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Mary-Reilly#tab=summary, inbetween 5 blockbuster success.

 

 

[murphydog]

Sure stars in the 80s and 90s could have whiffs, but even in the early 2000s, BO decisions were so different.  You'd read your local newspaper film critic, and maybe watch Siskel & Ebert, and then you'd show up to the movie theater and buy a ticket to something.  But if that movie was sold out, then you'd glance at the list and say, "oh I've heard of that one, that's the Will Smith movie" and you'd march in sight unseen.  So star power was so important purely because it'd breed some degree of familiarity, and many decisions were made split second without knowing anything about the critical consensus on the film.  It was very much "let's go see A movie" rather than "let's go see THIS movie".  

 

Fandango started changing things because you could buy a ticket ahead of time, and thus you wouldn't pick movies on a whim anymore.  For me, Rotten Tomatoes *really* changed things because all of the sudden I knew which star vehicles to avoid, and which smaller films would be excellent.  

[Barnack]

How much information come about movies before the decisions, (people can have seen easily 3 trailers for example) versus picking from movie poster or a DVD box, do change a lot how star powers work yes, in the top 5 decisions it is now way lower that it was at certain time.

 

But now star can still rapidly send a lot of information about a movie and still play an impact (say you see Kevin Hart-Dwayne Johnson on a movie that do speak a lot, same for Pitt-DiCaprio first time on screen) and still do.

[MrGlass2]

Pretty bad reviews in the end, it makes more sense to dump it in January.

[aladdino]

blake should already been a bond girl or joined a marvel/dc movie (and no green lantern happened many many years ago, i mean recently), but it seems like she only wants to headline mid buget movies by herself

Edited January 31, 2020 by aladdino

[murphydog]

10 hours ago, aladdino said:

blake should already been a bond girl or joined a marvel/dc movie (and no green lantern happened many many years ago, i mean recently), but it seems like she only wants to headline mid buget movies by herself

Or, alternatively, the mid-budget movies she's headlined are the best she's been offered.  She would have been a top tier Bond girl in the Brosnan era, but the Craig era has focused on an entirely different type of woman.  

 

It's so hard for younger leads on gigantic teen television series to really cross over into Hollywood as an A-List star.  Nobody young managed it from the The OC, Gilmore Girls (other than Melissa McCarthy but she's obviously not young), Glee, Vampire Diaries, Pretty Little Liars, Gossip Girl.  If anything, Blake has been wayyyyy more successful than virtually any other big "young 20s" TV star from her era, and she should be proud of that.  Lea Michele, Mischa Barton, and the other Gossip Girl girls would kill for her career.  Only Kristen Bell (and *only* bigger in movies than Blake because of Frozen, otherwise it's really comparable) and Tessa Thompson (smaller part, also on Veronica Mars) have managed to do better in Hollywood than Blake, unless I'm forgetting another female star from that decade of teen TV.

Edited January 31, 2020 by murphydog

[aladdino]

so this movie is projected to debut with 6m... yikes.

 

she needs to find a project that fits her again like the age of adaline or a simple favour

 

[JB33]

For me, it's trailers upon which I base my movie going decisions. Reviews come into play with smaller, arthouse/indie movies.

[aladdino]

THE RHYTHM SECTION ($2.5M+)

 

holy shit. what a crazy flop

[Barnack]

Maybe Anna 3.6M domestic OW had nothing to do with Besson controversy after all.

 

You need that around 80% RT, with an impressive set piece moment in the trailer and cast like Atomic Blonde to almost reach $100M in that genre to almost double that Rythm Section budget at the BO, there is really little room and small landing strip that do not allows for bad reviews.

 

Hardy Child 44 did 1.4M total (but that didn't had the support of a studio)

Edited February 1, 2020 by Barnack

[Box Office Hit]

 

[Ithil]

Titling it "The Rhythm Section" would be a good start. I literally had no idea this was an action film until just now.

[Neucentro]

1 hour ago, Ithil said:

Titling it "The Rhythm Section" would be a good start. I literally had no idea this was an action film until just now.

It could be mistaken as a music drama, based on the title alone.

[WeneedtotalkaboutKevin]

On 2/2/2020 at 1:25 AM, aladdino said:

THE RHYTHM SECTION ($2.5M+)

 

holy shit. what a crazy flop

It is even lower than Charlie's Angels and yet has a higher budget. 

 

What the hell !?

[Morieris]

On 9/19/2019 at 11:51 AM, Morieris said:

All of this time I thought this was about a former drum major who went around getting revenge with her baton. Which sounded WAY cooler.

 

And see, if it was like this it would have made money.

[aladdino]

#blakeisoverparty

[MrGlass2]

BOM updated their list, at least The Rythm Section will be remembered fondly for beating a 14-year-old box office record:

 

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/chart/worst_release_opening/?by_release_scale=super_saturated

 

Worst Wide Openings

By Release Scale

Saturated 3,000+ Theaters

 

1

The Rhythm Section

$2,800,000