Is Dwayne Johnson surpassing Will Smith?

[Alli]

The problem is that The Rock won't be able to keep going for too long. His brand has an expiration date. He can't do "normal" movies. He's too big to be believable as an average joe. so when he ages out of these "super-human" roles, he's kaput

[filmlover]

27 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

Rampage proves to me that The Rock can't take any concept to the bank on his own. It looked too dumb in the marketing for mass appeal, and it ended up opening poorly. Now granted it's having good WOM, but it should have opened to about twice as much if The Rock was such a draw right now. He's not even close to Smith level, and it would take like half a dozen 200m+ hits in a row that he stars in (not just supporting like Fast) before we could even begin to discuss it. 

On the contrary, I feel like it solidifies his drawing power by not going as low as past video game movies typically have. Put, say, Channing Tatum in it, and it likely wouldn't have done much better than Tomb Raider.

[La Binoche]

Both suck but I think Will Smith's movies were marginally better.  I did like Jumanji, though. 

[MovieMan89]

2 minutes ago, filmlover said:

On the contrary, I feel like it solidifies his drawing power by not going as low as past video game movies typically have. Put, say, Channing Tatum in it, and it likely wouldn't have done much better than Tomb Raider.

Most here were saying it couldn't open below 50m, and it didn't even come close. It didn't do much better than Tomb Raider for OW. It's just having better WOM. I doubt the good WOM is all because of The Rock himself. 

[baumer]

3 hours ago, MovieMan89 said:

Most here were saying it couldn't open below 50m, and it didn't even come close. It didn't do much better than Tomb Raider for OW. It's just having better WOM. I doubt the good WOM is all because of The Rock himself. 

 

Tomb raider was an established brand.  This was a video game.  I think it opened just fine.  

[filmlover]

2 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

Most here were saying it couldn't open below 50m, and it didn't even come close. It didn't do much better than Tomb Raider for OW. It's just having better WOM. I doubt the good WOM is all because of The Rock himself. 

But it's not like the movie is making Tomb Raider numbers either? It's on track to cross $100M by the end of its run, an impressive total for a video game film and another $100M+ hit for The Rock. The only real miss he's had in recent years was when he stepped outside of his PG-13 action/family film comfort zone with a project that sounded like a bad idea even on paper (an R-rated comedic reboot of a TV show that was already a parody of itself, and on top of that the movie sucked). He's clearly carved out a nice corner for himself and become reliable to audiences within particular genres.

[Arlborn]

7 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

Most here were saying it couldn't open below 50m, and it didn't even come close. It didn't do much better than Tomb Raider for OW. It's just having better WOM. I doubt the good WOM is all because of The Rock himself. 

You have the weirdest hate boners in this forum. You always need a big movie to nitpick to death it seems.

[MovieMan89]

The ironic thing is I was arguing The Rock had draw power back in the San Andreas days, and most weren't on board with the idea at all, lol. He's had some draw power for years now, I just don't think it's increased the way Jumanji would make some think. That movie was a lot of factors. 

[baumer]

Arnold Schwarzenegger will fade out once he gets out of the action mould too......some random dude in 1987

 

And then Arnold went and did this:

 

2/22/90	Kindergarten Cop	Uni.	$91,457,688	1,937	$7,918,560	1,833	8
12/9/88	Twins	Uni.	$111,938,388	1,659	$11,174,980	1,396	5

[baumer]

3 hours ago, MovieMan89 said:

The ironic thing is I was arguing The Rock had draw power back in the San Andreas days, and most weren't on board with the idea at all, lol. He's had some draw power for years now, I just don't think it's increased the way Jumanji would make some think. That movie was a lot of factors. 

 

This i agree with.

[Barnack]

8 minutes ago, Alli said:

The problem is that The Rock won't be able to keep going for too long. His brand has an expiration date. He can't do "normal" movies. He's too big to be believable as an average joe. so when he ages out of these "super-human" roles, he's kaput

The brand has an expiration date but he is getting close to 50 anyway. Maybe some director will have some interesting role for him when is body will start to worn out, the older SH will maybe be a mini-genre for a while. Liam Neeson is 65, Taken was 10 year's ago, male actor seem to be able to push it quite long in the action genre.

 

7 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

Most here were saying it couldn't open below 50m, and it didn't even come close. It didn't do much better than Tomb Raider for OW. It's just having better WOM. I doubt the good WOM is all because of The Rock himself. 

Well not sure how relevant to anything most people here are, what do they know ? What does it mean for them to be wrong ? (the idea that a non strong IP would have some floor and one that high is just ridiculous).

 

Has for the good WOM it is not all because of Johnson, but I think he is the element that was mentioned the most in term of making the movie worthy of being seen.

 

It still did do quite better than TR opening weekend. Comparing 30 market that both have OW info on Mojo

 

TR did 69m OW intl, 23.6m DBO, 92.6m in those 30 markets

Rampage did 88.4m OW intl, 35.7 DBO, 124.1m in those same 30 markets

 

That 50% better domestic (I would say that is definitely much better), 28% better in those 29 intl market and you are comparing Rampage a very small game in today cultural footprint to arguably the biggest pop-culture games of the 90s with a popular recent reboot of the game still selling well.

[baumer]

And when you say that his brand will expire.....how long do you think actors stay on top?  The really good ones have about 25 years in them.  The Rock has been at it for 17 years already.  So if he begins to die out in another ten years, then that won't be surprising.  No one stays on top forever.

[The Panda]

12 minutes ago, Arlborn said:

 

Denzel is a reliable draw up to a point only.

 

He hasn't been very active lately. I thought of him but his next projects don't even look very commercial. We'll see I guess.

None of Leo’s recent projects look commercial but they do commercial numbers anyways (which is what’s crazy).

 

Here’s DiCaprio’s films post titanic adjusted

1998 Man in the Iron Mask - 112m

2000 The Beach - 68m

2002 Catch Me If You Can - 251m

Gangs of New York - 120m

2004 The Aviator - 184m

2006 The Departed - 185m

Blood Diamond - 76m

2008 Body of Lies - 50m

Revolutionary Road - 28m

2010 Inception - 348m (Also Nolan’s only non-TDK movie to make over 200m)

Shutter Island - 148m

2011 J Edgar - 44m

2012 Django Unchained - 188m (Tarantino’s most successful film financially)

2013 The Great Gatsby - 159m (critical flop and failed Oscar Bait, as it was pushed back from an initial December release)

The Wolf of Wall Street - 134m (a hard R black comedy.  The Big Short was tamer and also had big names and didn’t come close)

2015 The Revenant - 196m (An Inarritu arthouse movie btw)

 

He doesn’t have a single franchise film on here, and even the few ‘blockbuster’ movies he has (like Inception and Catch Me) were still original and high form.

 

He’s not taking concepts or franchises that sell themselves and riding off of them.  He’s the selling point of his movies.  

 

I mean The Revenant for example was advertised as “DiCaprio faces The Bear/Nature” and people showed up for it.  He’s taking directors that aren’t always the most marketable, like Innaritu and Scorsese and makes their films financial successes.  And even more marketable directors, like Spielberg, Nolan and Tarantino he produced bigger hits than they had been producing in those time frames (in Tarantino’s case his biggest and Nolan’s case his biggest that wasn’t Batman).

 

Even some films that were failed Awards bait that got pushed back, like Shutter Island and Gatsby he turned into big hits.  I mean with Gatsby, not only was it a poor quality adaption, it’s a book people are only familiar with because they’re forced to read it in school, and turned it into a major Summer hit that was sandwiched into a month with Iron Man 3, STID, Fast 6 and Hangover 3.

 

I know this thread isn’t about DiCaprio.  But when I think about a modern movie star, I’d consider him over Dwayne simply because of the type of movies he consistently turns into hits (with his only flops being Revolutionary Road and J Edgar).

 

I also think it goes to show a Star being in mostly quality movies is vital to stay relevant.  GA will attach movie quality to a Star and associate them with “making good” or “making bad” movies.  People associate DiCaprio with good, original movies (despite actors having a minimal role in actual movie quality).

 

DiCaprio is also very picky about the projects he picks and the directors he works with.  His movies are mini-events in that sort of way.

[Barnack]

2 minutes ago, baumer said:

And when you say that his brand will expire.....how long do you think actors stay on top? 

At the top top seem to be around 12-18 year's often, Jim Carrey (1994 to say 2008), Arnold (1983 to say 1998), Will Smith (1995-2013)

 

Using this as a gross lazy way to give an estimate:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Ten_Money_Making_Stars_Poll

 

Delta between the first and last apparition

 

The ridiculous:

Wayne: 1949-1974 (25 year's)

Cruise: 1983 - 2007 (24 year's)

Hanks: 1988-2013 (25 year's)

Those are exceptional 

 

Usually it look more like

Mel Gibson (87-2002), 16 year's

Roberts (90-2004) , 15 year's

Arnold (85-1996), 12 year's

Carey (1994-2004), 11 year's

Will Smith (1997 to 2008), 12 year's

Pitt (1995 to 2013), 18 year's

Denzel (2001- still counting)

 

Johnson reached that kind of top around when, 2011 when he joined the Fast&Furious franchise ?

 

Could see him stay at the top until 2026/being 55 year's old if the movies quality follows.

 

[Alli]

25 minutes ago, baumer said:

Arnold Schwarzenegger will fade out once he gets out of the action mould too......some random dude in 1987

 

And then Arnold went and did this:

 

2/22/90	Kindergarten Cop	Uni.	$91,457,688	1,937	$7,918,560	1,833	8
12/9/88	Twins	Uni.	$111,938,388	1,659	$11,174,980	1,396	5

Arnold was 43 in 1990. The rock is 45 already and now he's at his peak. . I don't see the rock going at this pace past 50. IMO

 

anyway, arnold is not the best example since he took a break from acting.

 

 

[filmlover]

Yeah, I'd argue DiCaprio is the main draw these days. The Great Gatsby making nearly $150M despite being a period drama with mediocre reviews (a recipe for box office failure if there ever was one) is no small achievement. 

[Alli]

will smith will make a comeback with aladdin. and the ang lee movie sounds like it has potential

[Kvikk Lunsj]

52 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

The Rock doesn't have the draw power Leo's pinky does if we're talking about most draw power currently. I'd also say Denzel still has more pure draw power, he just never does the kinds of films that would gross 200m+. RDJ probably still has a huge amount of inherent draw power if he ever did anything outside of MCU these days for us to know for sure. 

Expect for the Judge. I do not think RDJ has star power. 

[Alli]

Sorry to derail, but we should be discussing Ansel Elgort. Look at his BO. It's crazy for how young he is. And his next movie The Goldfinch will be a hit too. He has BO and critical acclaim. The two movies (TFIOS and Baby Driver) he headlined were hits and he has had small roles in other hits too.  He came out of nowhere and he's killing it. Reminds me of cruise.

 

6/28/17	Baby Driver	TriS	$107,825,862	3,226	$20,553,320	3,226	4
3/18/16	The Divergent Series: Allegiant	LG/S	$66,184,051	3,740	$29,027,348	3,740	5
3/20/15	The Divergent Series: Insurgent	LG/S	$130,179,072	3,875	$52,263,680	3,875	2
10/1/14	Men, Women & Children	Par.	$705,908	608	$48,024	17	7
6/6/14	The Fault in our Stars	Fox	$124,872,350	3,340	$48,002,523	3,173	3
3/21/14	Divergent	LG/S	$150,947,895	3,936	$54,607,747	3,936	1
10/18/13	Carrie (2013)	SGem	$35,266,619	3,157	$16,101,552	3,157	6

[Barnack]

29 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Yeah, I'd argue DiCaprio is the main draw these days. The Great Gatsby making nearly $150M despite being a period drama with mediocre reviews (a recipe for box office failure if there ever was one) is no small achievement. 

Great Gatsby is one of the biggest book of all time too, with an over 100 million production budget.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_books#Between_20_million_and_30_million_copies

 

That help quite a lot (the 70s adaptation was also a large financial success without good reviews).

 

Revolutionary Road is more what usually happen for a period drama with mediocre reviews if they do not have a giant pre-made fanbase.

 

Edited April 23, 2018 by Barnack