August is still better than September, and the fourth weekend of that month is not that bad as Glorious Bastards did so well on that weekend. What makes me angry it that Warners probably picked that date only because it's an empty slot as of now. When bigger movies take that date later, they may move TLO to another date. Not only they totally lack any confidence in TLO, but also they're not even trying to make it a success. I'd never thought Nicholas Sparks-Zac Efron movie would be treated like this. Relativity has already set the date for new Sparks movie in June before they go into production, while WB was ignoring TLO's existence up until now. I've been a fan of huge A-list actors like Tom Cruise and Angelina Jolie for decades, so I'd never had to worry about my favorite stars' movies getting abandoned by studioes... until I became a fan of Zac. From 17 Again to TLO, his movies always had some trouble in securing proper release dates. I just wish he were a more successful actor so that his movies could find more support from distributors.
I'm okay with him doing more indies as long as he makes good films, but I don't want to go through stressing over distributing problems again. I'm just depressed even his studio project has a hard time getting released...
i think comparing inglourious basterds to tlo is not really useful for estimating potential box office success just cause they are so different. it's a bit too apples and oranges.
but what you said about a nicholas sparks movie being treated this way is true. even taking zac out of the equation, given how antsy studios are to get their hands on sparks' novels, it surprises me that they turn around and do this to one of the productions.
17 again's date situation was a very different thing than this. and neither are really having trouble getting released. date setting isn't really about that when dealing with studio movies. it's often more an indication of how they think the movie will do or what its quality is.
17 again's date getting moved around was more because they were giving it a lot of consideration. they knew it would play well and they were trying to maximize their publicity and the film's box office.
on the otherhand tlo and charlie st cloud's dates just seem like neglect (esp cstc). obvs wb might turn it around and prove they did this in the film's best interest by doing a stellar job with marketing but so far it's just a totally different attitude towards it than 17 again or a lot of their other films.
it'll smooth out though for zac, compared to those other stars he is ofc very young and at the beginning of a career. it is awkward though as he's big enough that he's well-known (more so than a lot of young actors his age) but not quite strong or respected enough to be put just anywhere haphazardly.
I just found out I typed "Glorious Bastards". LOL What was I thinking? Anyway, I mentioned that movie in order to say the date itself is not a box-office grave if a Tarantino-Brad Pitt movie chose the date. I don't think TLO will do as well as Inglorious Basterds either.
Zac is still very young and he needs time to grow some clout in the industry, but by the time he was at Zac'a age Tom Cruise was already a big star. I know Cruise's success is extremely rare case in the history of cinema, but I think Zac is just as talented and charismatic as young Cruise and he can become as successful if he has "luck". I find a lot of similarities between him and young Cruise: Pretty boy actors mostly known for their "killer smile" and "killer body". Despite their obvious talents, they were often slighted because they were "too pretty", "too short", "too nice", etc. Like Cruise got an Oscar nomination at 27 and continued his success well into his 30s and 40s, I hope Zac can find a long, successful career in Hollywood. I had absolutely zero doubt about his career before, but I just realized he may not have "luck". :(
I've been a fan of huge A-list actors like Tom Cruise and Angelina Jolie for decades, so I'd never had to worry about my favorite stars' movies getting abandoned by studioes... until I became a fan of Zac. From 17 Again to TLO, his movies always had some trouble in securing proper release dates. I just wish he were a more successful actor so that his movies could find more support from distributors.
I'm okay with him doing more indies as long as he makes good films, but I don't want to go through stressing over distributing problems again. I'm just depressed even his studio project has a hard time getting released...
Reply
but what you said about a nicholas sparks movie being treated this way is true. even taking zac out of the equation, given how antsy studios are to get their hands on sparks' novels, it surprises me that they turn around and do this to one of the productions.
17 again's date situation was a very different thing than this. and neither are really having trouble getting released. date setting isn't really about that when dealing with studio movies. it's often more an indication of how they think the movie will do or what its quality is.
17 again's date getting moved around was more because they were giving it a lot of consideration. they knew it would play well and they were trying to maximize their publicity and the film's box office.
on the otherhand tlo and charlie st cloud's dates just seem like neglect (esp cstc). obvs wb might turn it around and prove they did this in the film's best interest by doing a stellar job with marketing but so far it's just a totally different attitude towards it than 17 again or a lot of their other films.
it'll smooth out though for zac, compared to those other stars he is ofc very young and at the beginning of a career. it is awkward though as he's big enough that he's well-known (more so than a lot of young actors his age) but not quite strong or respected enough to be put just anywhere haphazardly.
Reply
Zac is still very young and he needs time to grow some clout in the industry, but by the time he was at Zac'a age Tom Cruise was already a big star. I know Cruise's success is extremely rare case in the history of cinema, but I think Zac is just as talented and charismatic as young Cruise and he can become as successful if he has "luck". I find a lot of similarities between him and young Cruise: Pretty boy actors mostly known for their "killer smile" and "killer body". Despite their obvious talents, they were often slighted because they were "too pretty", "too short", "too nice", etc. Like Cruise got an Oscar nomination at 27 and continued his success well into his 30s and 40s, I hope Zac can find a long, successful career in Hollywood. I had absolutely zero doubt about his career before, but I just realized he may not have "luck". :(
Reply
Leave a comment