/ 23 June 2010

Movies the critics can’t sink

Sex and the City II has been on screens for mere weeks, but it is well on its way to becoming one of the most critically derided films of all time.

Among other brickbats, the Guardian‘s film critic Peter Bradshaw called it “misjudged and quite incredibly boring”, The Times said it was “a waste of four great characters’ and the New York Times thought it was “desperate, grating and a little sad”.

The movie scored a pitiful 14% on the Rotten Tomatoes website film review aggregator.

But none of this has dented its commercial prospects — aimed at the bumper Memorial Day holiday weekend at the American box office. Influential website Deadline Hollywood reported that Sex and the City II took $17-million on its first day on release in the United States and the Internet Movie Database gives its take for the weekend as R36,8-million. So far it has grossed $73-million in the US and £6-million in the United Kingdom. Admittedly it dropped to about a third of that on the following weekend, but with territories besides the US and UK it should make back at least its $100-million estimated budget.
It’s the latest example of an ever-more prevalent phenomenon: The critic-proof movie.

The relationship between film critics and the industry has always been fractious, but in recent years examples of critical pastings preceding major box office returns have proliferated. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (“like watching paint dry while getting hit over the head with a frying pan”, wrote Bradshaw) has a 20% score on Rotten Tomatoes, but has taken $836-million worldwide since its release in 2009. The adaptation of Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code (“bizarre succession of baffling travelogue escapades”) is rated at 25% on Rotten Tomatoes, but took $758-million worldwide in 2006. Back in 2001 Lara Croft Tomb Raider (“it’s all very weak”) may have made a star of Angelina Jolie, but it totalled 19% on Rotten Tomatoes while taking $274-million globally.

Certain factors are all in play when it comes to the critic-proof movie. The film is almost always based on popular pre-existing products: video games, books, toys or, as in Sex and the City‘s case, TV shows. And it helps, of course, if it is a sequel to an already successful movie and has a massive marketing budget. The industry may claim that critics don’t matter, but Charles Gant, the film editor of Heat magazine and box-office blogger for the Guardian, says they may care more than they say.

“It’s all about putting on a brave face. People would rather make good movies than bad movies. Of course it’s all about creating value for their shareholders … you have to harden yourself against the bad reviews.”

There is also the issue that, although negative critical opinion cannot destroy a film, positive reviews can certainly help a film commercially. Gant says: “I firmly believe there’s an extra incremental audience that pays attention to reviews, and will go if they hear a film is good. It’s the floating-voter scenario. Had The Da Vinci Code got better reviews I believe it could have earned another $100-million. We don’t know what Sex and the City II‘s numbers will be, but the same will apply, I’m sure.

“It depends, of course, on who your film is aimed at. Transformers was for teenagers and they don’t care what other people think. But if you want an adult audience it does make a difference. It takes a lot to get them out, what with childcare and work commitments and whatever. But they’ll make an effort if they think a film is good. I’m not sure there’s a adult-aimed movie that is totally critic-proof.” —