 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| |||||
May 2 , 2005 (edited at 12:32a, May 3)
Whatever happened to movie stars?Others have written endlessly about how movie star salaries are pushing the cost of film production too far (not to mention that idiotic and cowardly EW story on star perks that was a lot more US Magazine than Wall Street Journal, though without naming names that we all know). I have long been of the opinion that there is always a group of stars who are paid a whole lot of money, but who earn their keep.
None of the top seven grossers of 2004 were films led by a major movie star. That includes Meet The Fockers, which certainly puts much of its success on the shoulders of Stresiand/Hoffman/DeNiro, but, like Ocean's Twelve (also a sequel), that is a combo platter sale... no one can really get the credit as the driving star. There are a bunch of movies like that.
In 2004 and 2003, about half the movies that opened to more than $10 million was a leading-star-driven vehicle. And given that we are just at the start of summer, I would expect that even though only seven of the twenty-seven films to get that $10 million start so far this year are leading-star-driven, by the end of the year we'll be back to a similar 50/50 bet. There are, of course, many significant variables that determine success, and this $10 million stat is far from being the most important one. However, in terms of determining the value of movies stars and the value in their salaries, no other element means as much.
And there is no real competition at the top of the heap for Will Smith. His last four films (five if you include Shark Tale, which had a very Big Willie heavy publicity push) all opened to more than $40 million. He is the only actor who has had $40 million in each of the last three years or in each of the last four years.
Only Brad Pitt can hope to match the feat in both of the last two years, with Troy last year and Mr. & Mrs. Smith coming this year. Sandler, Carrey & Vaughn join the competition when you reduce the opening level to $30 million... if Sandler & Carrey make that number, it would be three years in a row for them.
But wait... that is just taking America into account. When you look at worldwide grosses, Tom Cruise is still the high man on the totem pole. Looking at both men's last three films, even taking into account that Hitch is not 100% played out worldwide, Cruise has racked up about $1.1 billion while Smith is at just under $1 billion. (I'm not counting Shark Tale, though that title makes it even closer.) Go back four films and they are nearly dead even worldwide... include Shark Tale and Smith pulls slightly ahead.
One has to wonder when Will Smith, who has been in four films with Steven Spielberg's name attached, will make a film directed by Spielberg. Cruise should take a bit of a lead on Smith after War of the Worlds... but how much different would the grosses be if Smith was in the film instead of Cruise? Hmmm...
Also interesting, Cruise hasn't had a single $40 million-plus opening outside of the Mission:Impossible franchise. That's a big "if" for regular movie stars. But Smith has had seven $40 million-plus starts in his career, only two of them for franchise sequels, meaning that he has achieved this with five distinctly different vehicles.
Smith has a clear advantage in genre range, doing both big action and comedies. Remarkably, Hitch is the second highest worldwide grossing leading-star-driven comedy in history, after Bruce Almighty, outgrossing all three of the Austin Power films.
Speaking of Bruce Almighty, looking at slots #3 and #4 are another pair of close-together comedians... Adam Sandler and Jim Carrey. How do you separate the two statistically? Sandler's been a bit more consistent. Carrey has had two $240 million-plus domestic grosser and Sandler's never broken $165 million. But if you had to pick one in a mock movie draft, the lean has to go to Sandler on price. His films are consistently cheaper than Carrey's have been in the last five years.
How does the Top Ten fill out? Well, only nine actors have had multiple $20 million-plus openings in the last three years for films driven by their name and likeness. This leaves, as a "for instance" Keanu Reeves in another class, as Constantine is really a Keanu Reeves sell while The Matrix sequels are not.
(here's the edit)
#5 - Russell Crowe is one of the big boys, there is no doubt. But his power has been slowing, not growing, since the peak of Gladiator's $460 million worldwide gross. His one power team-up, Proof of Life, was his one miss this decade. His other two films, A Beautiful Mind and Master & Commander were really on his shoulders. Is there anyone else who could have gotten M&C to over $200 million worldwide these days? Maybe Mel Gibson.
#6 - Tom Hanks - People love to write him off, but The Polar Express quietly grossed just under $300 million worldwide last year, The Terminal did over $200 million worldwide and 2002's Road To Perdition/Catch Me If You Can combo grossed over $500 million worldwide. He probably jumped the proverbial shark a bit with Cast Away's breathtaking $430 million worldwide. But averaging $250 million worldwide per film (excluding the one off-the-charts film, The Ladykillers) is nothing to sneeze at.
#7 - Eddie Murphy - Another guy who has the media burying him head down all the time, 2002 was a bit of a disaster. But he came back strong commercially in 2003 with Daddy Day Care and The Haunted Mansion. Even staying away from credit for Shrek 2, Murphy is still a major power. And with two projects heating up at DreamWorks (Dreamgirls and a "Romeo & Juliet meets Guess Whose Coming To Dinner" comedy), Murphy may have his biggest successes still in front of him.
#8 - Ben Stiller and... - Stiller has become the go to guy when you want to do a buddy or ensemble comedy for the big money. Stiller has co-starred in three films in the last sixteen months that have opened to more than $20 million. His co-stars from the last two films, Vince Vaughn (Dodgeball) and Owen Wilson (Starsky & Hutch) team for the hot dark horse of this upcoming summer, The Wedding Crashers. And of course, he is the putative star of the biggest comedy in history, Meet The Fockers. He has not been so fortunate when the light is primarily on him, the highest grosser for that being Zoolander's $60 million worldwide. But as part of a team... wow!
#9 - Will Ferrell - By far, the shortest resume in this Top Ten, but Ferrell is the current heat, thrown into the fast lane by Elf's shocking $220 million worldwide. His other two major outings, Anchorman and Old School both were stuck around $90 million worldwide. Ferrell has two starring roles this summer (Kicking & Screaming and Bewitched) with a cameo on The Wedding Crashers. He is currently in production on The Producers, playing Franz Liebkind, which he will follow with a Marc Forster film.
#10 - Denzel Washington - He managed two $20 million openings, a $16 million start for Out of Time, and another three $20 million openers behind that MGM effort. That's five $20 million launches in his last six releases. Butts in seats. American seats. In spite of that, Washington has only two career $100 million domestic grossers. Denzel is one of the most consistent openers in the game, but the international grosses just aren't that strong. In no small part, this is because Washington has avoided action in favor of drama.
#11 - Steve Martin - I can see heads shaking from here, but Martin is an established name with back-to-back $27 million-plus openings, both of which grossed more than $130 million in America. Like Denzel Washington, he's a little wanting in international box office, but that's where we are.
But this list is just beginning. It gets a lot more complicated as we get into the next group of stars. Among the next group will be (in alphabetical order) Nic Cage, Vin Diesel, Lindsay Lohan, Nicole Kidman, Ashton Kutcher, Julia Roberts, John Travolta, Vince Vaughn, and Reese Witherspoon.
E-ME. How do these taste to you so far?
