Friday, July 14, 2006

Q. Why do you think SERENITY failed at the box office?

I'm going to say: because it was episodic. There were something like four self-contained episodes in the story. Each resolved almost completely, leaving just enough plot to ignite the next episode. So the movie didn't feel like a coherent story. It felt like a bunch of television episodes rammed together.

Fun, inventive television episodes, of course. Brilliantly written and convincingly acted. But episodes. A movie can't be a four-episode arc, it has to be a single story.

Also, Joss's cast of TV actors didn't exactly light the screen on fire. They just didn't feel larger than life. Possibly that has something to do with the way he shot them.

That's why I think it failed.

Now, a couple of caveats: did SERENITY fail? After all the DVD sales are in? And the foreign sales? I don't know. It cost about $40M. Made about $25M box office and $15M overseas. Those are box office numbers so the studio gets, say, half. But then it probably made another $20M easy on DVD sales and TV, not to mention any merchandising. I doubt anyone on the show was entitled to gross points, so the studio got to keep more of the money than it would have on a $150M Harrison Ford picture. I would bet the studio's internal accounting shows a slight profit.

More importantly: I don't know why the hell it failed. Movies with terrible scripts hit. Why did My Big Fat Greek Wedding make $100M at the box office instead of oh, say, $5M? Was it twenty times better than the next charming indie romance? My memory was it had almost no plot, and was stunningly short on obstacles. I'm sure I could have fixed the script, made it a better movie, and turned it into much less of a hit. Was Blair Witch actually a good picture? Would it have made $100M the summer before? Or the summer after? Or would it have disappeared into the cut-rate DVD bins?

People watch for stories, but they also watch for characters and spectacle, and because other people are watching. And movies with good scripts fail. As a writer you have to believe that a good script is better than a bad script. But there are other factors at work, so don't get too big a head on behalf of us writers...

UPDATE: Discussion continues in this post.

5:47 PM

12 Comments:

The primary issue is the fact that it's a sci-fi Western based on a show that very few people had seen. I know I wouldn't have gone if I hadn't seen the show, regardless of the fact that it got good reviews. The reviews were good, but no good enough to make the film a real must see.

One could say that the first Star Trek movie had the same problems, but the original show had a lot more viewers, and that was a different time, when there was a lot less media competition. And, the pre-screening campaign only served to remove buzz from the actual opening weekend, because most of the people who were interested in the film had already seen it.

Plus, the film was good, but it wasn't anywhere near Whedon's best work, if you show people The Body they may not get everything about it, but you have to respect it. Serenity is just a good time, not a masterpiece.

By  Patrick, at 4:40 PM  

I actually never got around to seeing this one, and I see a LOT of movies.

First, let me say that I've never seen the TV show it's based on. I know there was a show, but I don't have any history with it as a fan, so I didn't have a positive or negative opinion of it when the film was announced.

My reasons for not seeing it? I suppose it was a combination of reasons. The title didn't really mean anything to me, and probably worked against the film. I think having a weak title causes people (including me) to simply not notice when it gets talked about. I don't have any evidence to back this up, but I may have subconsciously ignored conversation or news about the film many times since the title didn't imply a subject I might have interest in. I think that's a huge problem for this one, and that makes it a tougher sell. The title seems to be the complete opposite of an action packed sci fi film.

SERENITY just seems kind of sleepy or warm and fuzzy. That feeling I get right before I fall asleep on the couch. Certainly not an entertaining sci fi space adventure.

I can also tell you that no one else I hang with saw it, so there was no buzz about it from my pals. I don't normally catch review shows or read editorial reviews, so I'm not sure how it did with critics. But within my circle of movie fan friends, no one seemed to have seen it, and because of that, it didn't come up in conversation once during the time it was showing in theaters. That's rare.

And from the previews I saw of it, I mostly thought it was going to be an imitation Star Trek story. That assumption is probably completely wrong, and I know that, but that's the impression the preview left me with.

But typically if a film is great and my initial reaction to trailers causes me to skip it opening week, I usually start to hear about it from friends and family. That seems to happen more often than not with quality films, the street buzz takes over and I end up seeing it a week after opening.

But none of that happened with Serenity, and my assumption about the previews were never challenged.

Bad marketing, bad title, and perhaps a complete lack of buzz on the street.

By  Kody Chamberlain, at 4:41 PM  

I never watched an episode of Firefly but wanted to see Serenity. I waited until it came out on DVD like I do for most movies since it's a 20 dollar ordeal to see a movie now (movie theater popcorn is a must).

Fact of the matter is, why would the masses fork over cash to see a movie when they weren't willing to watch the television show, which they got for free?

By  Captain Platypus, at 5:02 PM  

I had never heard of Serenity before seeing it in the theatre. I got dragged there by some of my comic shop buddies and then became a full fledged Browncoat. I probably would have never seen it if I wasn't already a geek.

My two cents:
-No popular actors to generate buzz while making the talk show circuit. Chiwetel was awesome, but thats the only reason I would have prefered a Laurence Fishburne or a Kevin Spacey as the Operative.
-Marketing was sub-par, but probably because of the above reason
-Released at the very tail end of the summer movie season, Sep 30. I think April, its original date, would have been better.
-Placed against Flightplan, a movie that came out a week earlier that went on to gross $200 million.
-Flightplan starred Jodie Foster, a two time Academy Award winning American institution.
-Serenity, at 2 hours, was way too long. I didn't think so, but I figure movie theatres prefer short movies so they can have more screenings per day.
-The soundtrack to the movie didn't blow anyone away. I don't know how much a soundtrack affects a movie's box office but I would imagine having a John Williams would not have hurt.
-Joss Whedon is still relatively unknown. I like it that way, but its not conducive to money making. (Note: I love everything Joss touches)
-stuff already mentioned: Ho-hum trailer, blah movie poster, and the advertising seemed to target only those that were going to see it (or HAD seen it) anyway.
-And finally, my main reason, the OPENING WEEKEND. I honestly believe if Serenity opened at number one that that may have been the catalyzer that studios always want. It would have been put in all the ads and mentioned on all the local televison stations. Damn you, Jodie Foster! ;)


I don't think anything about the actual story (no sex,too dark, too complex, extension of a cancelled TV series) is valid for a couple reasons. By and large everyone who saw it, enjoyed it, and of those most of them recommended it to others (thats from my own experience, perhaps not the rule). Also I can't imagine anyone saying "Wow, that preview looked cool, but it may have been a continuation of a short lived TV series that I have never heard of, therefore I will ignore the film." It just doesn't make sense. :)

By  c5mjohn, at 8:06 PM  

I liked Serenity as much as Firefly, and contrary to the beliefs of some kind folks posting here, I am not a mindless viewer. I visit movie theatres VERY rarely... mostly because the majority of big-screen sci-fi, among other genres of film these days, is cartoonish and silly with overblown effects that fail to support a underdeveloped script.

Sure, Serenity was derivitive, BUT WHAT ISN'T? Name ONE sci-fi flick in the last twenty years that wasn't derivitive of a celebrated predecessor. For that matter, name one truly different big screen movie of any ilk. One has to journey to the indie film world for new and exciting ideas.

'ksnake' - no offense, friend, but please note your own hypocrisy:

"Okay, so it's alright to call everybody who didn't go see this movie an idiot?"

"I hated Serenity--I thought it was dull, derivitive, and pointless. I didn't laugh at a single line--but I had to listen to a handful of morons... laugh DURING each line...."

You cannot, in one hand, criticize 'doitdoug' for calling people idiots for NOT seeing a movie, and then call people morons for enjoying the very same movie. That door doesn't swing both ways, brother.

I enjoyed Serenity and Firefly because, as an adult, this outer space world is one that feels more real to me. I know that is an odd statement. In the Serenity 'verse, though technology has advanced, humans are still humans, with human problems, and human frailties. There are no cartoon aliens. There is no utopia. There is no majically sword-length laser (no offence intended to Star Wars... at least not the original trilogy). Serenity depicts a human world with rusty steel and shady deals. A world wherein our hero, Mal, gets into fights and gets his butt kicked fairly regularly.

It is for everyone? No. Was it made for everyone? Not really. I believe the movie was made to satisfy fans of the television series, with a hope that it would catch on and build a larger fan base. I think both goals were served, somewhat, but not enough for it to spawn a Firefly/Serenity renaissance (though that continues to be my fervent hope).

'kody chaimberlain' - you ought to check out Serenity. You might like it. If not, that's cool, but if you're into the genre, it's worth the rental.

Final note: The original Buffy movie is one of my favorties. I've loved it since day one. Great flick.

By  Seth Asa, at 8:37 PM  

"Whedon himself has pronounced it dead." WHAT?! When?

ksnake - I followed your logic until your last two sentences. I agree that people have an irrational love of the 'verse(me included). I agree the public was indifferent to it. I agree that the whole concept is fairly implausible (although I have a hard time believing that's why ANYONE didn't go and see it). I agree that the acting, producing and directing wasn't award winning(although I felt they were all solid). And the writing was necessarily bogged down with exposition.

But when did Joss pronounce the Firefly universe dead? The movie basically broke even at the box office and all accounts say the DVDs are selling solidly. Is a sequel that out of the question? Perhaps made for television? All the actors are willing to do it as well as Joss. And if that doesn't happen there will be more comic books coming out in the near future.

And as for Joss's career. He is working on two movies (Goners and Wonder Woman). He is writing the best selling Astonishing X-Men comic book and will soon be launching a Buffy series.

And if those movies fall through he can always go back to being a very successfull (Academy Award nominated) script writer (Toy Story, Speed, Titan A.E. are to his credit).

By  c5mjohn, at 12:57 PM  

I think at least part of My Big Fat Greek Wedding's success was the fact that it was known for being Tom Hank's pet project. Who needs good writing when Hanks' name gives it buzz?

By  Crystal, at 1:52 PM  

Joss-holes...

By  Cunningham, at 6:12 PM  

The viewpoint of someone who had never heard of Serenity before seeing the film:

Honestly, I think poor marketing sums it up. I'm not a Buffy fan, don't follow Whedon at all, and don't watch TV. But I am a rabid movie wacher -- a regular renter who watches a movie a night and who tries to hit the big openings on the weekends. And I had never even heard of Serenity until the title of an article in one of my online newsfeeds caught my eye -- something like "the best sci-fi movie you've never seen", likely mentioned by Slate or Wired. So I sought it out at the local video store (which owns a single copy) and looked at the box (which I would never have touched otherwise -- too vague, combined with a title that is too new-age or, as ksnake pointed out, too adult hygiene). Standing there with the box in my hand, taking in the artwork and summary, I still likely wouldn't have rented it If Chiwetel Ejiofor hadn't been involved.

But I took it home, watched it, and thoroughly enjoyed it. It was a nice surprise. Knowing absolutely nothing about the backstory or series didn't matter -- it was self-contained. It had Ejiofor and a nice roster of C-listers who were already on my radar (Krumholtz, Paulson, Tudyk), and the commitment to the culture within the film was something you rarely see (I learned later this was because of the TV show -- these actors already know this world, etc.). I don't think the episodic factor, the complexity, or the darker tone worked against it at all -- in fact, I appreciated all those things. It wasn't an awful movie, by any means -- I was entertained, intrigued (though not enough to watch the series) and it was overall a good rental.

But the bottom line is that I had to actively seek it out and take it home with low expectations to experience it (more than the average moviegoe/renter is willing to do). Had it been marketed more successfully (and that includes the one-sheet/artwork), it might have done better.

By  kate, at 3:47 PM  

Ksnake,

When someone builds a castle from a deck of cards, are you the one who blows it down?

By  Sam, at 11:03 PM  

It took me a while to like the TV show (particularly since it was shown out of order). Once I saw the series on DVD, I loved it.

I was worried by the really awful trailer for Serenity. The female characters were basically non-existant. Now, this wasn't true in the movie, but people watching the Serenity trailer might have assumed that the women were just window dressing.

I generally liked the movie Serenity, thought I HATED the ending. But it was much more thoughtful than most SF movies. It could have benefitted from one name actor somewhere (I do love the idea of Kevin Spacey as the Operator), a trailer that focused on quickly introducing each character and then showed one of those amazing space battle scenes, maybe ending up with a pithy saying from Mr. Universe.

But it's too late now...


Laurie Mann
www.novelexperiment.com

By  Laurie Mann, at 3:31 PM  

What to say, a lot has already been covered. In fact, just going to say I did not see the series, except for one or two episodes I pretty much slept through during late night tv. I thought the movie was great. Good enough to convince me to buy the series and watch it on DVD. I feel the death of the series and failure of the movie at the box office is more the fault of promotion than anything else. As for the rest, it's all good. We will eventually see something new and exciting from this guy or he will fade into memory as everyone eventually does...

By  Tommy Reynolds, at 4:02 PM  

Post a Comment

Back to Complications Ensue main blog page.