Weekend, 6-7 January 2001

NEWS BY THE NUMBERS

There is NOTHING to write about this week. NOTHING! There isn’t a new situation or event worthy of more than a word or two. Does anyone really care if Basic Instinct 2 falls apart? And it will get made after the strike... they just want to make it now. The WGA is starting talks early... yeah, that’s happened before every strike. Spider-Man starts shooting. Hurrah. I look forward to the movie... you know, that thing that actually goes into theaters?

The one thing that surprised me this week was this piece from Jim Romenesko’s Media News:

"Why Godfrey Cheshire is no longer at New York Press.

"From JIM RIDLEY: I heard film critic Godfrey Cheshire was fired from the New York Press. Is this true? What gives? Cheshire is a strong writer and critic, especially on international cinema; if he has indeed been fired, he deserves better. Could this have anything to do with the roasting he gave the New Yorker’s Anthony Lane recently?

"New York Press editor RUSS SMITH responds: It’s true that Godfrey Cheshire was relieved of his duties at New York Press. The decision had nothing to do with his excellent roasting of the New Yorker’s Anthony Lane, but rather a belief by the paper’s editors that it was time for Godfrey to ply his talents elsewhere. He’d been at New York Press since 1990; weekly newspapers aren’t traditionally venues for such long engagements. One look at the Village Voice’s roster of writers, with the exception of Nat Hentoff, and perhaps disappointed Cheshire fans will understand this newspaper’s position. I’m certain Godfrey will find a new vehicle soon and wish him the best of luck."

And now, a few of your letters. Have a great weekend!

READERS OF THE DAY: The Zizzard of Oz writes -- "Not being in North America, I can’t really comment on the modern history (post 1980) -- although I do like to read about the state of play. In that regard, I was surprised to read... ‘And if the role of the critic is a big blur to everyone, including the critics themselves, how does the group overcome the lack of definition? How do we set goals for ourselves? How do we know what is "right"?’ One of your strengths (and the reason I keep coming back for over three years) is your ‘expert commentary’ on the biz. Sure, that does include talking about the product itself, but it is more than that. It’s the same as talking about your favourite sport with someone who knows the players. I don’t search out Internet criticism. Actually, I read very little criticism when it comes to choosing what film to see. Why? Because I paid to watch over 70 movies in theatres last year despite having two kids, the youngest under two. (That number doesn’t count the screeners, freebies, festivals, and industry events I get to.) Chances are I’ll pay to see occasional crappy (but populist) films because I want to understand movie making and marketing. I’m a regular movie attendee over 30 -- not the normal demographic.

"Look at the opening of Dude, Where’s My Car? My 21-year-old cousin just returned from a year studying in Florida at some party school. She was...was... was... was... y’know!... that it opened the day after she left (gotta wait three to six months to get it here). That movie doesn’t need critical attention. It needs kids, lots of them. Who then stayed away.

"So when do I read criticism? In a coffee shop on lazy Sunday afternoons. But mainly after I see a movie I love and want to see what other people thought of it. Bring It On just opened here, and I agree with every word you wrote on it (I did a search), but we are not in the same movie time zone. That is the risk and the beauty of Internet movie writing. Interestingly enough, your ‘Of the Year’ lists are much more accessible to me after a year. (I saw many of your ‘best of 1999’ in Australia in 2000.)

"Anyway, gotta go move my car. Talk to you some other time."

And this came from Dunk.Vin -- "I remember reading something last year (maybe on THB) about when people decide to see a movie. It was referencing why the tracking numbers were so far off on movies like X-Men, The Patriot, Perfect Storm, Scary Movie, etc. The results of the survey were that most people pick their movie the night they go see it. They may have a general idea of the movies they might be interested in from ads, trailers, etc., but the vast majority decide a few hours before (something like 80 percent). It also mentioned that most people look at the newspaper for start times. This would certainly give people the opportunity to read what the critics thought or see all the quote-whoring.

"Personally, I pick a movie based on the web critics and articles, magazine critics and articles, local newspaper critics, and Ebert.

"Whether a movie performs is based on two things -- advertisement and word-of-mouth (I put critics as a subset of word-of-mouth). Advertising gets you the opening weekend, and word-of-mouth dictates what the drop-offs will be in the second, third, etc. weeks. This is why movies like Titanic and The Sixth Sense kept cruising. Titanic had bad buzz, and started with a nice but not spectacular opening ($28M), but when the audiences saw the movie, they told their friends and it took off. The Sixth Sense had no buzz and opened moderately, but when the audiences saw the movie, they wanted to see it again (for obvious reasons) and told their friends.

"Some recent examples of lots of advertising and no good word-of-mouth are Charlie’s Angels and Unbreakable. Big openings, and then bad word-of-mouth led to bigger than expected drop-offs. With all the money spent on advertising, they may never make any real money.

"Some examples of no advertising and good word-of-mouth are Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and Croupier. No big openings, no ads on TV, just good word-of-mouth building. If Sony opens CTHD wide, I think it will clear $75 to $100M with minimal advertising. Croupier didn’t get anywhere near that, but made some good money because the audiences liked it.

"Of course, the last square in my chart is the ‘no advertising, no good word-of-mouth bucket. For some reason, Get Carter comes to mind. I can’t remember if it had any advertising, but it sure didn’t make any money. No one liked it.

"In summary, I agree with you that critics have minimal input. But, I don’t think anyone really believes they ever did (think of Almost Famous). People trust their friends more than they trust a critic. And their friends are the suckers that got drawn into a movie because of advertising in the first place."

E ME: Does anyone find ANYTHING interesting? Maybe you’re finally seeing some of the great, year-end movies. Let me know.