'Transformers' vs. 'Larry Crowne': Machines trump movie stars at the metroplex
| Los Angeles
It鈥檚 holiday weekend smackdown time at the multiplex. With 鈥�Transformers: Dark of the Moon鈥� in one corner and 鈥�Larry Crowne鈥� in the other, it鈥檚 officially machines versus movie stars. And from budgets to audience buzz, things are looking bleak for the flesh-and-blood icons.
It鈥檚 all part of a longer-term waning of the movie star era, says Hollywood.com box office analyst Paul Dergarabedian.
鈥淢ovie stars are not driving films so much anymore,鈥� he says. 鈥淚t鈥檚 the concept, the special effects, and 鈥� more and more 鈥� the marketing departments of the film studio calling the shots.鈥�
The event has begun to replace the story or the star, says Dustin Morrow, an independent filmmaker and professor at Temple University in Philadelphia. 鈥淢ore money is spent on marketing than making films now, so the focus is the campaign rather than the film,鈥� he says.
Robots vs. romance: How do the movies stack up?
The third installment of the Michael Bay robot extravaganza, budgeted at roughly $200 million, towers over the $15 million, Tom Hanks-loves-Julia Roberts romantic comedy.
The robots have already pulled in some $64 million in US theaters alone, just from the blockbuster鈥檚 mid-week opening. According to Mr. Dergarabedian, the romantic comedy 鈥渕ay鈥� pull in what it cost to make, over the four-day weekend.
Reviews aren鈥檛 helping much. Both films are mired in the mid-30s on the Rotten Tomatoes website. The Los Angeles Times critic, Kenneth Turan, dubbed Crowne 鈥渉ollow and shockingly unconvincing.鈥�
The bad press will hurt the love story more than the action movie, Dergarabedian says, because blockbuster films like the Transformers franchise are relatively critic-proof. 鈥淭hese mid-range romantic comedies that target older audiences take a hit from bad reviews because older people tend to read and care more about reviews,鈥� he says.
While pairing a romantic comedy against a big popcorn flick is standard counter-programming, even the smaller films with big names in them are approached as the latest installment in a popular genre.
Professor Morrow points to last week鈥檚 Cameron Diaz film, 鈥�Bad Teacher,鈥� and the upcoming 鈥�Horrible Bosses,鈥� featuring Jennifer Aniston 鈥� both big Hollywood names. 鈥淭he movies are being marketed as the 鈥榥ext鈥� in the raunchy adult category that Judd Apatow has made such a hit,鈥� he notes. 鈥淭he movies are not being marketed as star vehicles, because that isn鈥檛 working anymore.鈥�
The evolving role of the movie star
While high-concept films that lack a big name may be better for studio pocketbooks, stars have their place, says Morrow. 鈥淭hey certainly help drive all the ancillary movie industry, from magazines to audience engagement,鈥� he says.
Star power has also helped unlikely projects see the light of day. Without Kevin Costner behind it, he points out, 鈥�Dances with Wolves鈥� would never have been made. Of course, he adds with a laugh, that also opened the way for such debacles as 鈥淲aterworld鈥� and 鈥淭he Postman.鈥�
鈥淎s movies based on toys and comic books have grown more popular, the 鈥榮tar system鈥� has begun to slip further and further away,鈥� says Gwendolyn Foster, film professor at the University of Nebraska in Lincoln. The star system has been eroding for years, she notes, adding that the drop-off in mainstream films made for adults is pushing the trend along.
鈥淭his is too bad, in some ways,鈥� she notes, adding that great actors bring a spark and depth to a film that cannot be replaced by a machine. However, the professor adds, her students have adapted to what she calls a glut of bad movies aimed at people missing half a brain.
鈥淢y students seem to expect the movies to be bad,鈥� says Professor Foster. 鈥淭hey go to them to see how bad they are 鈥� and then gather online to excoriate them in a sort of communal sharing.鈥�
