Fate is Often the One to Blame for a Film’s Success or Failure

Who gets credit for Blockbuster Success
Rob Dobi

As the box office numbers roll in this summer, the media is asking the usual rude questions: Who is really responsible for the hits and misses? How big will be the profits and losses?

These are valid questions, except for the fact that they only lead to another question: Can we believe the answers provided by the studios?

In fact, studios often distort the numbers, not only to the media but to their own profit participants. Every revenue figure is subject to complex allocations, overhead fees and other accounting machinations. Tom Cruise’s “Edge of Tomorrow” may or may not have cost the $178 million quoted to the press, but I’m not sure even Tom knows the real numbers on cost or revenues — or is thrilled with them in any event.

I have been a profit participant on six movies over the years, and hence see the studio breakdowns. I prefer to read my science fiction in other formats.

The issue of credit grabbing is even more intriguing and solipsistic. Clearly Seth MacFarlane set himself up to take the heat on “A Million Ways to Die in the West” as did Ben Stiller did on “The Secret Life of Walter Mitty.” That’s what happens when stars decide to become auteurs.

By contrast, Angelina Jolie’s performance, and celebrity, clearly powered “Maleficent.” And John Green, who wrote the novel on which the movie “The Fault in Our Stars” was based, emerged as the unlikely star. (The pricey “Maleficent” and low-budget “Fault” will likely emerge among the top profit generators of summer).

When a studio chief takes the blame and gets fired, I always wince when the media sets forth an instant assessment. Jeff Robinov looked good at Warner Bros. thanks to “Gravity” and “Man of Steel.” But now we realize he also left behind Adam Sandler’s box office flop “Blended” and “Jupiter Ascending,” the costly, troubled tentpole from the Wachowski siblings that was pushed back seven months from its original release date because it wasn’t ready for its closeup. Even Clint Eastwood’s “Jersey Boys” proved problematic in getting to the screen.

Tom Rothman was put into turnaround by Rupert Murdoch, but his performance looks a lot better now that we’ve seen his refashioned “X-Men: Days of Future Past” and “Fault,” among Fox’s other summer successes.

The truth is that almost every hit picture was turned down by one studio chief after another before eliciting a greenlight. No one wanted to get near “Gravity” (Universal had shelved the project). “Most historic hits were executive inadvertencies,” the late Hollywood veteran producer and studio executive David Brown once told me.

One or two franchises can make a studio chief look like a genius. Alan Horn rode his “Harry Potter” and “Batman” series to a decade of plush profits. Not surprisingly, the studio’s present leadership has embarked on an archeological dig to recover lost superheroes.

On that front, Marvel’s slate under Kevin Feige, while producing formidable box office hits, has evidenced quirky relationships with its filmmakers. Edgar Wright recently got exterminated from “Ant-Man,” Kenneth Branagh was in constant combat with Paramount during “Thor,” and no director seems to return for a Marvel sequel. Who deserves the credit?

Studio vets will tell you that the ultimate success of a film stems from strong performances, smart directing and savvy marketing, with timely decisionmaking thrown in.

Even considering the mythic hits, the “what if” game is chilling to play. What if Marlon Brando had declined “The Godfather?” Or Jack Nicholson had said no to “Terms of Endearment?”

For studio heads and profit participants, it helps to have folks like Brando and Nicholson on your side. Also fate.

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 12

Leave a Reply


Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. Bob Price says:

    I think you mean, “what if Paramount had gotten its way and refused to let Coppola hire Brando for ‘The Godfather?'”

  2. Richard Thomas says:

    I see you are calling but, I am waiting for Detroit to implode.
    I’m thinking that the 15-25% of the equation that has morals or can relate will be enough to make our friends do some serious thinking as to which door has the least amount of noise.
    Another great article, thanks.

    • TheBigBangOf20thCenturyPopCulture says:

      You are an obvious troll plant from God knows where who has seemingly scared Peter and his column away. Variety needs moderators to patrol fools who can’t write and make no sense.

    • TheBigBangOf20thCenturyPopCulture says:

      John Boy, the cryptic references are getting old.

  3. TheBigBangOf20thCenturyPopCulture says:

    With few Brandos, Nicholsons or charismatic leading men left, poor casting is hardly luck. Fate is when you got a good picture but release it at the wrong time. What follows is when special effects are your stars, you consistently cast boys in men’s roles or you try to pass off stick figures as pretty women..

  4. DougW says:

    For the record, Jon Favreau directed Iron Man and Iron Man 2 for Marvel, and Joss Whedon is directing his second Avengers film.

  5. Global says:

    Bart would be the first to admit that international audiences with arguably juvenile tastes also contribute big time and to big time success. He’s not grumpy or lamenting really. It just is.

    and tv isn’t only where it’s at either. Just don’t expect to make much money up front on your smart drama in a film format.

  6. TV Exec says:

    Fate? Really? Talk about putting your head in the sand.

    It’s VERY obvious where the blame falls. It falls to the risk-averse execs who have business backgrounds and don’t trust their creatives. The reason all the talent (writers, directors, actors) and audiences are flocking to television is GREAT STORYTELLING. Storytelling that is NOT being done in film. Cable networks and Netflix give their creatives room to take risks–and it’s those shows that take risks draw in audiences and critics alike.

    Film execs should take a lesson from television. If not, they’ll get left behind.

    • TheBigBangOf20thCenturyPopCulture says:

      Are you one of the TV execs green lighting all these mindless reality shows and dystopian nightmare TV programs for millennials? Exactly what great storytelling are you talking about?

  7. Retirement time says:

    Grumpy old grandpa finding fault with the industry that passed him by. Yawn.

    • LOL says:

      Nah. Mr. Bart isn’t some dude that the industry flung out; he outgrew the industry. You’re wrong to say that, man.

      Only an uncultured idiot will stipulate that there is no fault with contemporary H’wood. The amount of illiterate-friendly crap coming out of the American studio system is astonishing. Development slates have become spreadsheets, more focussed on whether Chinese audiences can remain wowed by explosive special-effects. The soul and integrity has vacated American cinema. I have never seen it in such a woeful state as now. Everything is either aimed at stupid people or stupid people with kids, no-one else. Grownups with middlebrow tastes are forgotten.

More Voices News from Variety