Does Clooney's good rep in Hollywood keep him up there, despite being

[Kryton]

Re: Does Clooney's good rep in Hollywood keep him up there, despite be

Again, it doesn't set box office records, but that James Garner/Jack Lemmon likeability goes a long way.

--Ted

"My Fellow Americans" remains an all-time favorite movie of mine.

 

[benny]

Re: Does Clooney's good rep in Hollywood keep him up there, despite be

It's just that why is it that when someone like Patrick Swayze who made 1 or 2 bombs (which were City of Joy and Fatherhood) after box-office successes like Ghost and Point Break lose his A-list status and becomes a supporting player, while guys like Colin Farrell, John Travolta, and George Clooney retain their A-list status after bomb, after bomb, after bomb at the box-office?

Okay, raise of hands. Who can name the director or a co-star in either City of Joy or Fatherhood? Now, who can name at least one co-star from Ghost and Point Break? Swayze wasn't the only person involved in the successes nor was he the only one involved in the failures.

Films like Solaris and The Good German weren't cheap to make.

Define "expensive" and "cheap." Compared to Iron Man or Pirates of the Caribbean, cheap.

Solaris was not massively expensive, just $47 million. (Source: Box Office Mojo) It made $30 mil back in both domestic and foreign receipts, bringing it just $17 mil short of breaking even. Don't think it did that in rentals and DVD's?

The Good German was less successful, bringing in $1 on a $38 mil budget.

Let's also consider the names attached to both of these projects, most like vanity productions never designed to be huge money makers by the studios, instead part of an overall deal to keep talent happy.

Not to mention the films they were both competing with. The Good Shepherd, Night at the Museum, Rocky Balboa, Pursuit of Happyness for Good German.

Out of Sight lost money at the box-office.

Wrong. Budget of $48 million, made $77 million worldwide. (Source: Box Office Mojo, IMDB)

And, people are saying Soderbergh is going down as a filmmaker after those box-office losses, yet Clooney is spared the blame?

Which people? Links? Sources?

Just look at the numbers for One Fine Day, Batman & Robin, The Peacemaker, and Out of Sight in quick succession? All in the red.

Let's skip Out of Sight since I've already addressed it.

There is no possible way One Fine Day lost money. $97 million worldwide gross, another $22 million in rentals. No way on this Earth it cost more than the $97 million to make. No. Way. (Source: Box Office Mojo, IMDB)

Batman and Robin...$125 million budget, made $238 million worldwide. (Source: Box Office Mojo)

The Peacemaker...Budget $50 million, worldwide gross $110 million. (Source: Box Office Mojo)

Chris O'Donnell, Uma Thurman, Alicia Silverston, and Arnold Schwarzenegger were pulling in similar numbers at the box-office after Batman & Robin and look where their careers went when they couldn't put enough seats at the movie theatres?

O'Donnell has guest starred recently on Grey's Anatomy (and The Practice). He's worked steadily since B&R.

Thurman has at least one project in every year since B&R, including Quentin Tarantino's Kill Bill films.

Arnie...consider he's also been governor of Cali for the last couple of years. The 6th Day covered it's production budget in worldwide gross. And, oh yeah, a little movie called Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines. $200 million dollar budget...$433 mil worldwide.

But, Clooney is spared and he's still considered an "A-list superstar" when the bottomline here is that his primary job as a star is to bring in a lot of butts into seats in theatres based on his appeal, but he is not doing that.

Depends on who you talk to. His "job" could also be to make movies be believes in, regardless of the box office potential. In that case, he succeeds.

No one went to watch Intolerable Cruelty and Leatherheads, and as good as O Brother Where Art Thou? was it was not a moneymaker, and I remember Clooney himself disappointed that so few people were watching his Michael Clayton. Why is that?

Sigh. Intolerable Cruelty budget of $60 million, worldwide $120 million. I'll reserve judgement on Leatherheads until more time has passed.

And I call massive bullshit on O Brother not being a moneymaker. Budget of $26 million, made $45 million in the US alone. Good enough?

Where is the link to Clooney being disappointed no one was seeing Clayton? $25 million estimated budget. Made nearly double that in domestic release alone.

There is the Hollywood hype machine, and then there are guys like Tom Cruise, Johnny Depp, Will Smith, and Matt Damon who are expected to deliver. And if they don't, then they are out of there. If I were a producer, outside of the Ocean's Eleven franchise, I would be extremely wary of betting on a George Clooney film being able to recoup one's money back at the box-office.

Thank god you're not a producer. By your standards, Matt Damon would have no job after The Good Shepherd, yet he has five projects in various states of production. Neither would Will Smith after The Legend of Bagger Vance. I've provided numbers as per the above. What do you have? A 2 year old article? Wow, great support!

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Does Clooney's good rep in Hollywood keep him up there, despite be

It's just that why is it that when someone like Patrick Swayze who made 1 or 2 bombs (which were City of Joy and Fatherhood) after box-office successes like Ghost and Point Break lose his A-list status and becomes a supporting player, while guys like Colin Farrell, John Travolta, and George Clooney retain their A-list status after bomb, after bomb, after bomb at the box-office?

Swayze had a great deal less range and talent to fall back upon to resurrect his career. Nice man, good dancer, good bod, but basically little more than a hunk. Travolta, for one, is very talented guy with a lot more range as an actor than one would expect.

 

[pookha]

Re: Does Clooney's good rep in Hollywood keep him up there, despite be

glad that benny adressed how some of the older movies listed by gwr indeed made more money then they cost just like some of clooney's more recent films did.

my case still is clooney can be involved in move like good luck and good night and because he is playing a major role with its development people went to see it who other wise might not ever go near a film like that.

and the good german is different because soderbergh was calling some rather odd creative shots which might be why it did so badly at the box office.

aspect ratio, which modern theaters are not equipped to handle, the prints are in 1.85:1, with black bars on the sides.


The film was shot as if it had been made in 1945. Only studio back lots, sets and local Los Angeles locations were used. No radio microphones were used, the film was lit with only incandescent lights and period lenses were used on the cameras. The actors were directed to perform in a presentational, stage style.

 

[benny]

Re: Does Clooney's good rep in Hollywood keep him up there, despite be

glad that benny adressed how some of the older movies listed by gwr indeed made more money then they cost just like some of clooney's more recent films did.

Which is a fact, I'm sure, GWR is going to ignore, just like my previous post on this subject on page 1.

 

[dragunzng]

Re: Does Clooney's good rep in Hollywood keep him up there, despite be

I often see Clooney in the same sort of light as Bogart, Gable and Peck... maybe just a hint of McQueen as well. That is to say, he's our last great movie star. There are celebrities like Tom Cruise and Will Smith, and then there are movie stars. Clooney's the latter. He's one of the few actors I'd see in just about anything even if the genre isn't my usual cup of tea.

 

[exodus]

Re: Does Clooney's good rep in Hollywood keep him up there, despite be

I found Clooney has become a very serious writer/ director. He makes films for the thinking man, films that leave you with an impression long after the film is over. It's not about money for Clooney, it's about educating his audience. Making "Good Night, Good Luck" black & white shows he respects artistic value of film.

 

[sidious618]

Re: Does Clooney's good rep in Hollywood keep him up there, despite be

Clooney is great. He usually makes excellent films and I respect a man who does what he feels is a good film as opposed to just doing whatever will get the money.

 

[Good Will Riker]

Re: Does Clooney's good rep in Hollywood keep him up there, despite be

Guys, I happen to be a fan of some of the man's works and have them in my DVD collection (O, Brother Where Art Thou?, Ocean's Eleven, Out of Sight).

It's just that even most Clooney fans have to admit that they watch a majority of his films when they are first released on DVD as opposed to when they first came out in theatres (Batman & Robin, not withstanding, unfortunately...).

 

[pookha]

Re: Does Clooney's good rep in Hollywood keep him up there, despite be

no i go and watch them in the theatre.
and you do seem to be ignoring the point most of his movies do make their money back.

 

[Good Will Riker]

Re: Does Clooney's good rep in Hollywood keep him up there, despite be

^^^

As they say (or the paparazzi and Sarah Larson, etc.)...You Don't Mess with the Clooney!

 

[TGTheodore]

Re: Does Clooney's good rep in Hollywood keep him up there, despite be

It's just that even most Clooney fans have to admit that they watch a majority of his films when they are first released on DVD as opposed to when they first came out in theatres

Wow, you GOTTA tell me where THAT fact was published ...

--Ted

 

[Hermiod]

Re: Does Clooney's good rep in Hollywood keep him up there, despite be

^Well, it's true for me but that's because I only go to blockbusters (because I enjoy the audio and visual experience) and Clooney doesn't make those. I prefer watching the kind of film Clooney has been making on DVD/Blu-Ray. That said, I buy the film, I don't rent it.

 

[Pingfah]

Re: Does Clooney's good rep in Hollywood keep him up there, despite be

And I call massive bullshit on O Brother not being a moneymaker. Budget of $26 million, made $45 million in the US alone. Good enough?

$26 million?

With 8 million copies sold in America alone that means they made back the production budget and then some just off the soundtrack!

 

[benny]

Re: Does Clooney's good rep in Hollywood keep him up there, despite be

See, GWR has no interest in actually debating the issue with any facts or verifiable data. GWR, instead, keeps throwing out suppositions, theories and otherwise useless "facts" in an attempt to bolster his "argument." Problem is...he has no argument. I've provided numbers, box office data and other information.

 

[exodus]

Re: Does Clooney's good rep in Hollywood keep him up there, despite be

See, GWR has no interest in actually debating the issue with any facts or verifiable data. GWR, instead, keeps throwing out suppositions, theories and otherwise useless "facts" in an attempt to bolster his "argument." Problem is...he has no argument. I've provided numbers, box office data and other information.

Pretty much.