• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The BFG flops: Has Spielberg lost his blockbuster touch? (Variety)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Z2Ub.jpg

"If you ask anyone across the country or around the world to name a director, he’s at the top of the list,” said Paul Dergarabedian, senior media analyst at comScore. “The Spielberg brand is that strong.”

But tastes shift and the failure of “The BFG” this weekend hints that Spielberg may be a different kind of filmmaker, one who’s no longer attuned to the zeitgeist.
The $140 million children’s fantasy echoes “E.T.” in its construction — there’s a lonely child, a visitor from another world and an underlying current of gentle uplift. It’s easy to see why Walden Media and Disney would think they had a hit on their hands. Not only were they getting Spielberg returning to the family film genre, but “The BFG” was based on a beloved children’s book by Roald Dahl and boasted a script by “E.T.’s” Melissa Mathison.

Unfortunately for the studios and backers now staring at a write down, Spielberg isn’t the draw he once was. “The BFG,” which opened to an anemic $19.6 million, is shaping up to be one of the biggest flops of Spielberg’s career, rivaling “1941,” his bloated World War II comedy.

At DreamWorks, his production company, Spielberg’s selection of films was erratic. For every “Lincoln,” there was a costly dud such as “Need for Speed” or “The Fifth Estate.” His biggest success was producing “Jurassic World,” a return to Isla Nublar that Universal backed and Colin Trevorrow directed.

All the while, the ground was shifting beneath Spielberg’s feet. Comic-book movies are the rage now, not science-fiction spectacles or B-movie throwbacks of the kind that made his name. And when it comes to children’s movies, Pixar is the new gold standard — the company’s “Finding Dory” overshadowed “The BFG” this weekend, racking up $41.9 million in its third week of release. The box office is dominated by fewer, bigger movies, leaving little left over for the rest. In the past, Spielberg hedged against his own appeal, partnering with stars like Tom Cruise and Tom Hanks, but in modern Hollywood, those actors’ appeal is wobbly. It’s superheroes who sell tickets, not the men and women behind the mask.

Even the era of the big director has faded. With the possible exceptions of Christopher Nolan or James Cameron, there are very few filmmakers whose presence behind the camera is enough to send fanboys flocking. In a sign of the generational schism when it comes to Spielberg’s appeal, 15% of audiences over 25 cited the director as the reason for buying tickets to “The BFG” compared to 8% of those under 25, according to a survey by comScore.

From John Ford to Billy Wilder to Alfred Hitchcock, at some point every great filmmaker finds themselves at odds with the times. Spielberg will try to prove that “The BFG” is just a momentary blip on his resume, not a sign that he’s become an anachronism, when “Ready Player One” hits theaters in 2018. The adaptation of the best-selling novel unfolds in a virtual reality universe, and is a clear play for younger audiences more interested in gaming than friendly giants.

If it works, Spielberg will be back on top and freshly relevant to a younger generation. If it doesn’t, it could signal that the unthinkable has happened. Spielberg, the most commercially successful director of all time, is out of touch.

http://variety.com/2016/film/box-office/steven-spielberg-bfg-box-office-flop-1201808161/

You guys think Spielberg's era is ending, especially due to comic book movies and their popularity, or is it more that not a lot of people wanted to see a movie about a creepy giant old man kidnapping a little girl? This isn't a parody thread, btw, I genuinely am wondering if Spielberg's era is winding up. He's got Ready Player One and Indy 5 coming up, and Indy 5 will likely be a big flop with Indy fans just in retaliation for 4. Apparently he has It's What I Do and The Kidnapping of Edgardo Mortara coming up too or something. It seems like he's on a downward turn starting with this one, and that makes me sad, as I absolutely loved Tintin. Hell, I'd settle for another Munich, which What I Do or Edgardo could be. I thought that with Bridge of Spies too, and that didn't quite turn out. I'm not looking forward to Ready Player One personally, either, but who knows?
 

Dice//

Banned
It looked/felt like a family film from the early 90s. Which isn't a bad thing I guess, but the film just didn't look interesting enough.
(which I guess makes sense for Spielberg)
 

kswiston

Member
Kids movies without a hook are hard sells now. Being based off a book with a popular author doesn't really count for shit when you are up against franchise films and animated films with $200-500M in marketing tie ins.

Disney didn't bring their A-Game to BFG's marketing, and Spielberg needs to give up that computer animation style that him and Zemeckis have been playing around with for the past decade or so.
 
i think the giants look ugly as hell, and aside from the names in the credits it doesn't really appeal to me but i'm gonna check it out soon for sure.

i'm glad he's so late into his career that something like this won't hurt him though, we need people like spielberg, nolan, cameron etc. in the big budget landscape so badly right now.
 
Why is the tone so apocalyptic for Spielberg? It's one movie that was reviewed fairly well, so it's not a "bad" film, just one that could've used better marketing and a better title. I think Disney just put it too close to Finding Dory.

Just chalk this up as a missed opportunity and move on, Spielberg's got three other movies that sound a hell of a lot more promising.
 
The BFG is a movie that probably would have gone over far better in the 80s or 90s.
I think this kind of story just doesn't fly now-a-days, no matter how acclaimed it might be critically.
I fear that Pete's Dragon will suffer a similar fate.
 

Einchy

semen stains the mountaintops
Dory actually looked good, also. That's the bigger difference.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure The BFG isn't bad, and I plan to see it.. but damn does it look generic and uninteresting.

Indeed, BFG just doesn't seem interesting at all. I'll watch it one day when it comes out on BluRay but it's not something that I gotta watch in theaters.
 
I heard the movie was pretty good?

Anyway, I hope Spielberg just says screw it and gives us another cool alien film like Close Encounters.
 

Draconian

Member
It's a shame too because I really enjoyed it.

But who are you kidding OP? There's no way on this green earth Indy 5 will flop. You're being rather silly.
 

kswiston

Member
It's a shame too because I really enjoyed it.

But who are you kidding OP? There's no way on this green earth Indy 5 will flop. You're being rather silly.

Ya. Internet fan backlash from 10 years ago means little. See Star Wars or Jurassic World post shitty sequels. Indy 4 had decent legs and made close to $800M back in 2008. I wouldn't be that surprised to see the sequel in the $900M-1B range.
 
Indy will be big but I dunno how you do a movie like that with a 70+ year old man. Totally different from Han Solo, Indy was far more physical an action hero.

Spielberg's best bet is to bring back Shia or recast the son. Would rather he make Tintin 2 honestly. Indy 4 sucked.
 

FStop7

Banned
Why is the tone so apocalyptic for Spielberg? It's one movie that was reviewed fairly well, so it's not a "bad" film, just one that could've used better marketing and a better title. I think Disney just put it too close to Finding Dory.

Just chalk this up as a missed opportunity and move on, Spielberg's got three other movies that sound a hell of a lot more promising.

Tintin bombed, too.

Spielberg's directed plenty of turds. Some of them were even successful (Crystal Skull.) I think he makes the movies he wants to make in the style that suits him. He'll keep going as long as he can and he'll probably make at least one more big hit and he'll probably make at least one more stinker.
 
Honestly, the movie didn't look all that interesting, I think people put too much stock in to the book's popularity (Hell, I had never heard of it), and it opened too close to Finding Dory. Not a surprise it didn't do too well.
 

Hazmat

Member
I was perplexed seeing commercials for this last weekend with my mom and my sister, because I had never heard of the book. I was really surprised to learn that this was a thing and that I hadn't heard of it. It just doesn't look all that interesting.

Edit: Wow at the post right above me saying almost the same thing.
 

Bishop89

Member
Well his last mega blockbuster box office film was crystal skull... 8 years ago. And that was based on an extremely popular franchise.

Last one based on something not that popular which did monster numbers was war of the worlds, 11 years ago.

He has had good success with tintin and Lincoln, but nothing else setting the charts on fire.

Honestly his pickings have been pretty poor lately (in terms of box office draw).

A historical film about an American president, a Ww1 film centred around a horse, and a legal thriller.

Not saying they are bad films, but not the type of films that are going to draw in the crowd.
 

nullref

Member
Hasn't Spielberg been in this phase for like, well over a decade now? He's like the Professor Emeritus of Hollywood, kinda just doing stuff for fun, or because he likes the material, or to play around with some new tech.

He's a master; one of the greatest directors of all time – he has nothing left to prove. You can appreciate his mastery in whatever he does, even if it isn't a complete success, and even if the material isn't necessarily super-exciting to mainstream audiences. (See Bridge of Spies, which is great.) He's past the point of needing to give a shit whether everything he does is a big hit commercially.
 

Nudull

Banned
No one really gives a crap about Dahl outside of Wonka and Matilda. None of his other works reached that sort of cultural relevance that would've made something like this still work in this day and age.
 

Mengetsu

Member
The film didn't look appealing in the slightest to me. The new Pete's Dragon looked way better to me and im and adult. I cam only imagine todays kids.
 

FStop7

Banned
Another thing is that a lot of people didn't seem to be familiar with the story. I read it when I was a kid and while I thought it was good it wasn't as good as Charlie and the Chocolate Factory or Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator.
 
Instead of BFG, Spielberg should have chosen Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator. Would have had the Wonka name-brand and the ability to do a bunch of crazy bullshit that was in the book.
 

3N16MA

Banned
The BFG never stood a chance with Dory opening 2 weeks earlier. It now had to contend with Pets a week later. Add to the fact that it never looked like a blockbuster to begin with.

It's been 8 years since Spielberg directed a blockbuster type film.
 
Spielberg films are reliably good, but it has been a long time since they were great. I think his time is just spread thin these days between directing, producing, and his family.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom