The Fifth Estate, Benedict Cumberbatch & Fangirl Problems

[pennswoods]

[Originally Posted to Tumblr]

I woke up in a good mood this Monday morning, but that quickly soured as I scoured some of my favorite sites for information about Benedict Cumberbatch and came across an explosion of commentary regarding how poorly The Fifth Estate performed, and how this is bad news for Benedict. This meant I had a very bad morning because as a huge Cumberbatch fan, I am overly invested in him having a long, varied, and full movie/television/theatre career so I will never run out of things to reblog on Tumblr.

According to fans in the industry or at least people who profess to be in the film industry (the money part) but may just be trolling, Benedict’s name being associated with underperforming films is what is going to have a negative impact on him being hired to lead films in Hollywood. And this has nothing to do with his talent but everything to do with whether his face will get butts in seats and in dollars in pockets. This is all according to this rather polemically titled rant thread here.

For non-fannish perspectives see also

• This gossip blog: http://www.laineygossip.com/Benedict-Cumberbatchs-The-Fifth-Estate-bombs-at-the-box-office/28392


• The Hollywood Reporter article that started it all: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/box-office-gravity-no-1-649646


• And this REALLY unfortunately titled article : http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/10/20/box-office-disaster-benedict-cumberbatch-the-fifth-estate/

Things I did not know but have learned since reading all this:

1. STiD was considered not a good showing so this is a black mark against him.


2. That he is on all the posters for TFE and did all the promo and pretty much the fact that Dreamworks were using his rising star power to see the film is going to work hugely against him.


3. The Hobbit is not considered a financial success and The Desolation of Smaug is not anticipated to do that hot either.

Things I suspected and have been confirmed by reading all this:

1. Hollywood investors are super conservative and only care about making money, but also suck at understanding why things do or don’t make a lot of money and therefore like to blame the talent - especially if new.


2. Having a bit part in a film or two that does well artistically is not going to help demonstrate that Benedict is a good investment to lead a film.


3. The Hollywood model of putting all its money on big blockbuster tentpole films is a broken model and more and more BIG films are failing (see The Lone Ranger, the Man of Steel, John Carter of Mars) and this is going to result in even less variety in films coming out as film investors get super conservative and scared and avoid risks. Even Spielberg is having a difficult time producing and has to invests in his own films for them to happen: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/film-news/10119344/Steven-Spielberg-predicts-film-industry-meltdown.html

Reading all this made me think that Assange, in his letter to Benedict, was right about one thing but for the wrong reason. Dreamworks used Benedict. Dreamworks opened TFE too broadly and had too high an estimate for a film about a man that a good chunk of America doesn’t like/thinks is a threat to national security/doesn’t remember or care about. Their marketing relied heavily on Benedict’s face, rising star, and fan base, a good chunk of which is not in the US and still can’t see the damn film because it hasn’t opened yet (it comes out in Germany the end of October, in Denmark in November, in Sweden in December, and I cannot even find a release date for Japan.)

So they hitched their film to his rising star to try and take advantage of his momentum, to make some money. They took a risk, but Benedict was too new and hadn’t reached high enough visibility among the audiences they hoped to reach (not the Cumbercollective) and his promotion was limited (Katie Couric is not David Letterman or the Colbert Report) and it brought in so little money on its opening weekend that now whenever the financial failure of the film is being discussed, it’s linked with Benedict’s name.

Bummer…

Comments

[daasgrrl.livejournal.com]

1. I see nothing to worry about. His talent will ensure he has an amazing and long-lived career (assuming mental health or other personal issues don't interfere). What he ISN'T is a Hollywood leading man, period. Should that opinion come back to haunt me, I won't be sorry.

2. I agree, I doubt the average US citizen cares too much about either BC or Assange, and the allegations against the latter have dismayed people who might otherwise have been pro-. I'm vaguely surprised that it's opening so late here, because Assange is Australian and as such has periodically been all over the news. Or perhaps that was deliberate, because the reviews will be damning (and people will probably say the role should have gone to an Australian). Reserving judgement on that question for now.

3. Back to point 1. He will always be offered great roles in Britain - theatre/movies/TV - should he want them, and character roles elsewhere.

[cleflink.livejournal.com]

*tilts head* But STiD is the highest grossing film in the Star Trek franchise. And the Hobbit made over a billion dollars (15th highest grossing film in history). Who are these people who think that these numbers are not good enough? Especially for genre films...

I'm pretty sure that all the positive reviews from Fifth Estate have been about Benedict's acting which should hold him in decently good stead despite the suck that was the box office take. He's also got a couple of other films on the line that are getting very well received in limited release (I think 12 Years a Slave is already getting Oscar buzz). It's not good news, certainly, but he's not riding on it the way he might be if he hadn't been so busy in the last couple of years.

Although I wonder if, in some way, Benedict might actually be kind of relieved to avoid the big blockbusters and focus on smaller and/or non American films. He seems to be the kind of guy who finds fame difficult.

[(Anonymous)]

Its more than the fact that people "don't like/thinks is a threat".

The American culture in the past few decades or so have become very 'now' oriented. Assange is old news. Most news here is now on the Snowden story (and by the time Hollywood makes a picture out of it, that could be old news too).

With everything going on in the US right now, people don't want to go to movies to be educated. With the cost of a movie ticket in most areas, if a family (or even a couple) are going to spend that much on admission (and lets not even get into the cost of refreshments if they want any), they want to be entertained, taken away from reality, find some relief from the bad stuff in the news.

And really? Benedict Cumberbatch is not a well known name here in the states yet to a large percentage of the population. It's not that big a draw to a lot of demographics.

[dragonsinger954.livejournal.com]

Pennswood, if a comment comes into be screened by "anon" that was me, apparently LJ signed me out and I didn't know it ^___-

[droxy.livejournal.com]

this is part of the shitty business of show business. but every BBC movie I watch we see many familiar faces so BC will have plenty of work there.


"Hollywood investors are super conservative and only care about making money, but also suck at understanding why things do or don’t make a lot of money and therefore like to blame the talent - especially if new."--- well hollywood on a whole is soooo not politically conservative, and very liberal. However the Hollywood crowd (From musicians, actors, filmmakers, and all the supporting industry) likes keeping their money and use every tax loop hole available. Movie making is time consuming and expensive to do it well, like any producers of product, and it is product, they want a ROI. Spielberg reinvests to get control over his pictures. Budget sometimes matters in making a great movie, sometimes it doesn't.

Fear not, the after theater market makes money for them as well. Some movies that stunk at the box office make quite a bit on the DVD market, and make even more money than the theater run. Theater goers are not us, they are mostly young men. If middle aged women poured money into theaters the market would adjust accordingly to follow the money.

I liked the hobbit, but it's production value (writing) wasn't as good as LOTR. That's what kills a movie. Great actors cannot fix crappy writing and a crappy story.

[foxestacado.livejournal.com]

I am second-guessing the articles that think STiD and The Hobbit are not considered box office successes, and as a result, I think they're arguing for the sake of arguing, and perhaps being a little too critical of one box office failure whose promotional material heavily focused on BC (and how could they not? He's playing Julian Assange). But they are right in that he didn't get the promotion in the US (did he even do Katie Couric? I wasn't sure about that).

At least in LA, TFE is everywhere: on buses, billboards, tv spots, etc. But in general, the advertisements weren't well done, i.e. they don't tell audiences anything beyond that it is some sort of thriller-looking film.

So, there were problems to the release of the film that can be blamed on Dreamworks, and I don't think anyone can fault BC much, given that his acting is consistently pointing out as being the redeeming aspect of the film.

But it does suck to read about how this might affect his career, long-term. I think he went through this before though with previous leading-man films, and perhaps it's true, he just doesn't demonstrate leading man numbers.

[shadowfireflame.livejournal.com]

Weirdly, this post actually makes me feel a lot better because I know exactly what you’ve been going through, and it’s nice that I’m not the only one! I’ve been very disappointed in the reception to The Fifth Estate, which I feel is important for U.S. moviegoers to see, and above all I actually enjoyed (and was blown away yet again by its lead).

All I want is for Benedict to be happy and phenomenally successful so he can have his choice of a spread of a wide variety roles, which I think is what he wants (and certainly what I would love to see). Dreamworks was dumb, and I really hate to see people punishing Benedict over that, as I felt he did a fantastic job. And I want to see him in more roles of whatever he chooses, but yeah, I’m greedy and want him in leading roles because then I’ll get to see more of him!

[lampblack.livejournal.com]

Wanted to see this movie and hadn't realized that it was out yet. Will get my uninformed ass in a theater seat soon!

Numbers Never Lie

[major-dallas.livejournal.com]

According to fans in the industry or at least people who profess to be in the film industry (the money part) but may just be trolling, Benedict’s name being associated with underperforming films is what is going to have a negative impact on him being hired to lead films in Hollywood. And this has nothing to do with his talent but everything to do with whether his face will get butts in seats and in dollars in pockets. This is all according to this rather polemically titled rant thread here.

Ah yes, the Fan "Experts", well let's look at his films, since Tinker Tailor Solider Spy, which had a very weak US Opening, but a very good UK opening of 2.8 million pounds off 382 screens, average of: $7329.84 per screen over a Friday-Sunday weekend. there's a lot more I could go into this movie, like the fact that the end of its run in the US, it made almost as much as it did in the UK, just between these 2 countries it almost tripled its budget of 20 million pounds.

Anyway moving on

War Horse(2011) Budget $66 million(Profit: $196 million), US opening was & 14.5 million finishing its US run at $79+ million, worlwide though it made $177,584,879, combined with DVD, Blu Rays, Video Ondemends, and Cable Licensing Rights, this movie crossed the profit line.

next up, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey(Its actually on as I'm typing this, in fact the dwarves and Gandalf are escaping the Goblin mountain and Bilbo just beat Gollum in the Riddle Game), to which Cumberbatch does double duty as Smaug and The Necromancer. Still he was barely in it and trust me, this movie crossed the profit line, so we'll just go to the next movie, which was...



in which Cumberbatch SMEXYIED his way through equally against Kirk and Spock, seriously, I need to post numbers on this? Ok, here we go, budget: $190 million (profit line: $570 million) US opening was: $70+ million, overall run in the US was: $228,773,450, worlwide run was: $465 million it was considered a disappointing theatre run, but DVD, Blu Rays, Video on Demands, Licensing Rights for Cable networks, etc. will make this movie very profitable, Star Trek Geeks will see to that ;p

I'm not going into 12 years a Slave, as it really isn't through a Run yet, but anyways, my points are that Cumberbatch movies perform, numbers never lie :D

so go tell those "Experts" to Fuck themselves

[errandofmercy.livejournal.com]

Don't fret, my dear fangirl! Benedict is going to be fine. Plenty of actors have had terrible experiences and come out all the better for it. Zachary Quinto played Tori Spelling's gay best friend in an entire TV series (among other weird shit) and he turned out ok!

A lot of this hype and Batch-bashing is just a way for some media people to get noticed and keep their jobs. It wouldn't be as lucrative if they were just blathering about how great he is.

You and I both know that he is too awesome to be contained by a couple of offbeat or unprofitable movies. Numerous shows (Star Trek, Firefly, etc.) have shown us that a small but devoted following can make a huge difference in an actor's career successes. The fans won't stop clamoring for him, so he's not going anywhere :)