COMPASS & LOTR comparison

[davem]

I'm still left wondering why TGC flopped in the US - was it because US audiences decided it was a bad film (ie badly made, dull, confusing, etc), or because it was a 'good' film (ie well-made, interesting, exciting, etc) but with a 'bad' message - in other words, did the 'athiestic' element kill it in America? Or was it the marketing - one line of reasoning I've heard recently is that it was marketed by New Line as another LotR - big battles & cool beheadings 'n' stuff - & when audiences actually got a 12 year old girl her talking polar bear they went home disappointed & told their friends not to bother..

Whatever - one assumes that if Warner decides to go ahead with sequels the sensibilities of US audiences will play a smaller part in their calculations than they did for New line - it will probably be the same story for the sequels as for the original - poor performance in the US & big box office everywhere else.

[Sauron the White]

As a resident of the USA, it seemed to me that the film was sold around the idea of a little girl and a polar bear. Those two elements were very up front and center in every trailer and ad that I saw. If there had been more advertising pushing big epic battles the film may have done better. The negative publicity surrounding the anti-religious message (not saying there was one but that perception existed) did not help. However, I do not think it was conclusive. It really was not advertised as the second coming of LOTR in the trailers and ads that I saw.

Hollywood studios made several fortunes offthe formula of "a boy and his dog" stories up to and including E.T.. But maybe times have changed and the publics - or at least the American public - taste has changed. . Perhaps the American public simply did not want to see "a girl and her polar bear" no matter how it was dressed up or what lipstick was placed upon its face.

[Bêthberry]

Interesting point about the nature of the heroine.

There's lots of evidence garnered by elementary school teachers in North America--and I don't know how it would break down vis-a-vis Canada versus US--that elementary school girls will read books with heroes of both genders but that elementary school boys will not read books with girl heroes. This is not an absolute, hardfast characteristic, but it is quite substantial, extensively documented, especially among educators who are concerned about the reading gap between girls and boys. Is this trait limited to North America or can it also be found in European education?

So, if little North American boys don't like or want to read books about little girls, perhaps that trait carries over to male choices about movies as well, and also into adulthood? It didn't seem to apply to The Wizard of Oz, but we are no longer in Kansas now.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

. Perhaps the American public simply did not want to see "a girl and her polar bear" no matter how it was dressed up or what lipstick was placed upon its face.

But isn't it interesting that the public in just about every other country did? Shall we have to resort to Oscar Wilde for an explanation of this? Why did the rest of the world go mad for something the American public didn't?

[Sauron the White]

from davem

Why did the rest of the world go mad for something the American public didn't?

First, how to you define the term "go mad for"? Boxofficemojo reports that the worldwide take on GC is $345 mil of which $70 million is from the USA and the rest ($275) being other markets. Thats about 20/80 split.

The LOTR films had the following non USA reciepts
ROTK $742 MIL
TTT $584 mil
FOTR $556 mil

GC is at $245 mil foreign receipts. That is still not half of what the lowest earning LOTR film took in outside the USA. And then consider that USA receipts ranged from 33 to 36 % of the gross.

So your description of the rest of the world going mad for GC is a bit of over selling the idea.

Shall we have to resort to Oscar Wilde for an explanation of this?

I would never reject anyone using the great man as a source of inspiration. However, I also think that someone from the opposite viewpoint could use the standard and well worn "a fool and his money are soon parted".

[davem]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

FOTR $556 mil

GC is at $245 mil foreign receipts. That is still not half of what the lowest earning LOTR film took in outside the USA. And then consider that USA receipts ranged from 33 to 36 % of the gross.

So your description of the rest of the world going mad for GC is a bit of over selling the idea.

No it isn't - you can't compare any movie to the LotR films (apart maybe from Titanic). I'm speaking generally - TGC was not a flop anywhere else in the world as far as I'm aware. In fact, it was a huge success (I think it was the third most popular film in the UK last year, after HP 5 & Bourne 3).

I would never reject anyone using the great man as a source of inspiration. However, I also think that someone from the opposite viewpoint could use the standard and well worn "a fool and his money are soon parted".

Yes - but you're the one who keeps bringing up 'little Jonny' being out of step with the rest of the band.... Maybe the rest of the world got it wrong & the US is the little boy shouting out that 'the Emperor's got nowt on ' but... these are matters of personal taste so I don't think that applies. Outside the US TGC was a popular movie - people wanted to see it. In the US they didn't. Clearly the RotW got something out of the movie that US audiences either didn't get or didn't want.

[Sauron the White]

Truthfully, I don't think anyone got it right... or wrong for that matter. Like you said, its simply a matter of taste. The film underperformed in the States probably by a good 50%. If you figure that the Stateside revenues should have been about 35% of the total, you would have to double the actual revenues to get something around that figure.

I realize that you don't like them, but I do think that if they had stacked the film with more action - more epic battles ala LOTR, the film would have performed better here. And the word of mouth was not very good.

Why do some nations embrace certain things while other nations do not? Thats a serious questions for sociologists and social anthropologists. Why do the French - with their reputation for sophistication and the better things in life - go gaga for Jerry Lewis? Thats one of the great cultural mysteries.

Bethberry has a valid point about the boys not wanting to see the film. I have a six year old grandson who simply adores everything LOTR. One of his favorite things is to watch it when he spends the night and we have seen those movies more times than I can even count. He thought the first Narnia movie was good but nothing like LOTR. He liked SPIDERWICK also. I showed him the trailer for COMPASS and offered to take him but he did not want to see it. When we see the toys in the store he has never wanted them.

[Mister Underhill]

Originally Posted by davem

Whatever - one assumes that if Warner decides to go ahead with sequels the sensibilities of US audiences will play a smaller part in their calculations than they did for New line - it will probably be the same story for the sequels as for the original - poor performance in the US & big box office everywhere else.

Presumably the opposite is true. Since the point of the article is that Warner would be precluded from reaping much in the way of foreign B.O. because of the sequel distribution deals New Line already made, I'd venture to say that if they did decide to forge ahead with sequels, they'd try to make them more appealing to U.S. audiences, since that would be where the money is for them. How they'd do that, I don't know.

As for the reasons for the film not doing well -- I think Bb might be on to something with the gender gap. Interesting side note -- wasn't it the head of production at Warners who was widely reported last fall as proclaiming that WB was going to stop making pictures with female leads? That wouldn't bode well for sequels either.

Anyway, I think there might've been a bit of a demographic gap, too -- "girl and her bear" maybe didn't really appeal to older audiences, especially those coveted 18-25 year old males, but the trailers didn't say "family movie" either.

I don't put any stock in the whole atheism factor. Religious protests usually serve to give a picture free publicity, and if anything only increase its box office prospects -- see Harry Potter. From where I stand, the protests seemed pretty half-hearted over here anyway.