The Last Duel - Ridley Scott, Matt Damon & Adam Driver | October 15, 2021

[Valonqar]

8 hours ago, ViktorLosAngeles said:

I wish TLD outperforms, but it seems that there's no buzz. At least not in LA. There are billboards everywhere, but haven't heard a single soul talking about it or planning to see it.

 

Yep. This isn't the case of bad movie/bad WOM but good movie/no interest (much like that other praised Medieval film Green Knight). Spots and featurettes views are dismal. Eternals is pulling millions of views per spot and this can't even get close to 10K. Buzz is zero. Unless OS somehow goes for it (they didn't care for Halloween), nothing will save it. 

 

 

[Ozymandias]

Fox really blew it with this one.  I get that the subject matter is dark and the pandemic is still keeping a lot of people away from movie theaters, but the marketing on this has been nonexistent.  Only 1 trailer and virtually zero other marketing up until like 2 weeks ago for a movie with Matt Damon and Adam Driver directed by Ridley Scott?  Thats some studio mismanagement right there.

[Valonqar]

59 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

Fox really blew it with this one.  I get that the subject matter is dark and the pandemic is still keeping a lot of people away from movie theaters, but the marketing on this has been nonexistent.  Only 1 trailer and virtually zero other marketing up until like 2 weeks ago for a movie with Matt Damon and Adam Driver directed by Ridley Scott?  Thats some studio mismanagement right there.

 

If I can make a guess, Fox isn't exactly Disney's priority studio, and the subject matter made Disney nervous. So kind of like, better bury it than suffer image damage. I'm basing this strictly on reports that Disney was very squeamish about Fox Searchlight's Jojo Rabbit too and weren't supportive until later in the game when it was obvious that the movie wasn't going to be controversial. So a mismatch between the (parent) studio and product causing the (parent) studio question why they made the product to begin with. 

[Firepower]

1 hour ago, Ozymandias said:

Fox really blew it with this one.  I get that the subject matter is dark and the pandemic is still keeping a lot of people away from movie theaters, but the marketing on this has been nonexistent.  Only 1 trailer and virtually zero other marketing up until like 2 weeks ago for a movie with Matt Damon and Adam Driver directed by Ridley Scott?  Thats some studio mismanagement right there.

I love when people blame marketing every time a good movie bombs, but not themselves. Sure, there were some cases when marketing was to blame, but in most cases it's just people don't care about non-franchise stuff no matter how you sell it or talent involved, and it's getting worse each year.

Edited October 14, 2021 by Firepower

[Valonqar]

While I concede that The Last Duel is a tough sell (medieval genre isn't popular and it has a heavy topic), putting this movie in the busiest month, sandwiched between a number of franchises with built-in fandom, is 100% on the studio. Pandemic or not, a Ridley Scott epic starring Matt and Ben should have opened at least like King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (15M). And that, I think, was perfectly doable in a dead month. Such as September. Perhaps tad below 15M but certainly not below 10M like tracking indicates. 

And yes, on top of terrible release date that was obvious for months ahead, marketing was completely last minute. And that last minute virtually started after non-critics audience loved the movie in Venice. 

 

They dumped it plain and simple. Under 10M opening is inexcusable and isn't all down to tough sell genre.

[Last Man Standing]

13 minutes ago, Firepower said:

I love when people blame marketing every time a good movie bombs, but not themselves. Sure, there were some cases when marketing was to blame, but in most cases it's just people don't care about non-franchise stuff no matter how you sell it or talent involved, and it's getting worse each year.

Some non-franchise stuff like Free Guy are doing well, but you could definitely make the case that the kinds of movies that get people into the theaters are becoming more and more limited, anything that's not a CGI fest action-comedy seems like a tough sell these days.

[Firepower]

22 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

While I concede that The Last Duel is a tough sell (medieval genre isn't popular and it has a heavy topic), putting this movie in the busiest month, sandwiched between a number of franchises with built-in fandom, is 100% on the studio. Pandemic or not, a Ridley Scott epic starring Matt and Ben should have opened at least like King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (15M). And that, I think, was perfectly doable in a dead month. Such as September. Perhaps tad below 15M but certainly not below 10M like tracking indicates. 

And yes, on top of terrible release date that was obvious for months ahead, marketing was completely last minute. And that last minute virtually started after non-critics audience loved the movie in Venice. 

 

They dumped it plain and simple. Under 10M opening is inexcusable and isn't all down to tough sell genre.

The problem is it would still be a money-loser, with better marketing or not, so it doesn't change the point to me. If people don't care at all, even the best marketing won't convince them to show up.

[Valonqar]

Then why make it to begin with if you know there won't be any interest? And isn't the point to build interest somehow if you want to go ahead with the product anyway? Fox didn't do either. It made a movie that they knew would be a tough sell...then decided not to sell it. What gives? 

[Perfundle]

7 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

Then why make it to begin with if you know there won't be any interest? And isn't the point to build interest somehow if you want to go ahead with the product anyway? Fox didn't do either. It made a movie that they knew would be a tough sell...then decided not to sell it. What gives? 

 

Probably because this movie was conceived and started filming before COVID, and interest in movies with darker themes crashed with the pandemic. In any case, its original release schedule of December 25, 2020 (limited) and January 8, 2021 (wide) says that it was gunning for awards, and any money it made was a bonus. Perhaps its less than stellar reviews made the studio think that it now has no chance of either.

[cookie]

6 minutes ago, Perfundle said:

 

Probably because this movie was conceived and started filming before COVID, and interest in movies with darker themes crashed with the pandemic. In any case, its original release schedule of December 25, 2020 (limited) and January 8, 2021 (wide) says that it was gunning for awards, and any money it made was a bonus. Perhaps its less than stellar reviews made the studio think that it now has no chance of either.

1917 had the same release pattern so it may be that they wanted to emulate that initially.

[Firepower]

18 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

Then why make it to begin with if you know there won't be any interest?

I guess some studios are unironically more interested in good stuff than general audience, so they make those movies knowing they won't be profitable no matter how they sell it 😊

 

18 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

 And isn't the point to build interest somehow if you want to go ahead with the product anyway?

Well it was like that 10+ years ago, but things have changed, now it's all about IP, IP sells big movies, marketing is often the same in many cases (depending on a budget and how studio feels about its movie)

 

18 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

Fox didn't do either. It made a movie that they knew would be a tough sell...then decided not to sell it. What gives? 

Below 10 would turn into 15. Would it make a difference?

[Eric Duncan]

22 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

Then why make it to begin with if you know there won't be any interest? And isn't the point to build interest somehow if you want to go ahead with the product anyway? Fox didn't do either. It made a movie that they knew would be a tough sell...then decided not to sell it. What gives? 

Outside of the fact that it was greenlit two years ago (a lot can happen from development to final release) when the old guard at 20th Century was still around, it's a star-studded epic that was greenlit at a time when Me Too was at its peak of relevancy and when adult-skewing dramas still had an okay slice of the box office pie, from a slew of creatives who have had great success and recognition before, as well as an epic duel as the film's big centerpiece. It's still a premise and film that needed to make sure everything went right, but it's not like this was an uncommercial affair.

[Valonqar]

Makes sense. Though keeping it in October when the competition looked crazy for months didn't help. Even Venom 2 which was going to do well changed dates X times to maximize its potential. The Last Duel kept sitting in its bad spot with resignation. Oh well, it isn't out loss of investment.  And Scott has Napoleon epic lined up already so that's good.

[Eric Duncan]

Just now, Valonqar said:

Makes sense. Though keeping it in October when the competition looked crazy for months didn't help. Even Venom 2 which was going to do well changed dates X times to maximize its potential. The Last Duel kept sitting in its bad spot with resignation. Oh well, it isn't out loss of investment.  And Scott has Napoleon epic lined up already so that's good.

Well the other big issue is that Disney doesn't care about these kinds of movies. Last Duel wasn't designed to sell toys, make sequels out of, or turn into a theme park ride. Free Guy basically falls under the Disney template of "character-driven family fantasy adventure comedy", so there's a reason why Disney was willing to push that film harder.

[Valonqar]

13 minutes ago, Eric Atreides said:

Well the other big issue is that Disney doesn't care about these kinds of movies. Last Duel wasn't designed to sell toys, make sequels out of, or turn into a theme park ride. Free Guy basically falls under the Disney template of "character-driven family fantasy adventure comedy", so there's a reason why Disney was willing to push that film harder.

 

That's an excellent point and really explains the whole situation. 

[Firepower]

Well, Gladiator 2 should do better (if Russell is coming back).

Edited October 14, 2021 by Firepower

[Valonqar]

Maximus is dead. I really hope they don't try to cheapen it with some "he only fainted" BS. The ending was powerful because it didn't pull any punches. 

 

Cast a great actor like Russell, write a great story and they'll come.

[Val357]

1 hour ago, Eric Atreides said:

Well the other big issue is that Disney doesn't care about these kinds of movies. Last Duel wasn't designed to sell toys, make sequels out of, or turn into a theme park ride. Free Guy basically falls under the Disney template of "character-driven family fantasy adventure comedy", so there's a reason why Disney was willing to push that film harder.

You've got that right!

 

I know the subject matter of this film is touchy, and I know my tastes don't apply to everyone else, but it isn't THAT hard a sell. It looks epic, it has a great cast. It's not like this is a slow, depressing melodrama. There's a lot for studios to work with here, in my humble opinion.

[Val357]

18 minutes ago, Firepower said:

Well, Gladiator 2 should do better (if Russell is coming back).

Ridley is actually doing Gladiator 2???

 

How is that supposed to work?

[Last Man Standing]

As someone who watched Gladiator 10+ times I really don't want Gladiator 2 to exist.