A radically inventive movie goes unseen over the weekend. Where are the cinephiles!?
I’m super bummed that “Here” pulled in just 4 million dollars this weekend. There was a time when you could build an entire marketing campaign around a movie like this. From the originality of the premise to the cutting-edge technology used to make the film (they’re utilizing new AI software to de-age the characters).
The technical aspects of the film seemed particularly challenging. For example, old Tom Hanks would have to move like 30 year old Tom Hanks in some scenes. Imagine flopping down on a couch like a 30 year old when you’re 70. So they would sometimes need to bring in body actors. And because it would be apparent if someone didn’t move like Tom Hanks, they’d have the body actors go through hundreds of hours of old Tom Hanks movies and practice the way that he walked at different ages.
That’s the kind of thing that, back when Zemeckis was king, everyone would’ve been talking about in the lead-up to this film’s release. Now, it’s a collective shoulder shrug.
Cast Away (a Zemeckis-Hanks classic) probably wasn’t as good as we remember. But the story BEHIND that movie captivated moviegoers for an entire year. “What!? Tom Hanks shot the first half of the movie at 220 pounds, then spent six months losing 70 pounds before shooting the second half of the movie!? That’s incredible!!! I have to see that movie!”
I may be overanalyzing. It could just come down to “It’s an old person’s movie.” But I’m surprised they didn’t put more of a marketing push behind it. Releasing something in movie theaters in 2024 without a gigantic marketing push is suicide. Comic book movies with 100 million dollar marketing campaigns struggle to get awareness. Why would you think a borderline indie film is going to gain awareness when the only Tom Hanks interview that came across my computer this weekend was a hiking walk with Kevin Nealon?
Right on cue, Judd Apatow came in to add fuel to the fire. “It’s all completion rate,” he said, discussing the new jargon from the streamers. Then, speaking from the faux perspective of a Netflix exec: “We must have them complete it. We cannot put out a film if anyone shuts it off!” He then continued on, “There’s an intensity to everything, [where it must be] sexy or exciting or terrifying. And I think it changes it so you don’t have quieter, subtler, whatever funny, human things because I think they’re afraid people are gonna shut it off or not go [to theaters]. You lose a lot of good stuff when everything is so wired.”
It’s both true what Apatow is saying and it’s not. You can DEFINITELY still tell those stories. You just can’t tell them on the big screen as often. And that’s what chuffs everyone who’s used to the old ways of business. Their ego is guiding them. It’s that need to not just create something that people see, but to get that red carpet treatment. To get that status that comes from being on 3000 screens. Who the heck cares as long as people see it?
The real problem with Here’s paltry box office may be its author, Robert Zemeckis. I’ve been low-key obsessed with Zemeckis’s career since his unprecedented hot streak. The man owned Hollywood for a decade. Romancing the Stone, Back to the Future, Forrest Gump, Contact, Cast Away. Why did he fall so quickly? I have a new theory every few years and my latest is that all of his previous films were built on top of such positive emotions. Back to the Future was pure joy. Forrest Gump was the most optimistic character in cinema history. A lot of his more recent movies are built on negative emotions. Sadness (Welcome to Marwen), despair (Flight).
I don’t want to dissuade all you unhappy writers ready to cry tears onto the pages of your latest depressing opuses. It’s not that movies built on negative emotions can’t work. But the audience is WAY smaller. And the margin for error is way slimmer. Basically, you have to be Hemingway at his peak to pull it off.
And, by the way, I don’t want something to be lost in all this, which is that I absolutely love the ingenuity of this idea. I commend Zemeckis for swinging for the fences. In a marketplace packed with base hits out to left field, Zemeckis gets major props for doing something so risky. But dude, Robert. When you’re swinging for the fences, you need to hit the screenplay right smack dab on the “Rawlings” logo. You swung and you missed. A screenplay like this (one with so many potential pitfalls) needs to be airtight.
Oh, and in stark contrast to Apatow’s recent complaint, a character-driven script JUST SOLD for 2 million dollars last week. At least I think it’s character-driven. We’ll find out on Wednesday when I review it. But it’s important to mention because sometimes Hollywood creatives get caught up in all the negative chatter. “The business is slow right now! There are no jobs.” If I had a penny for every time I heard “it’s slow” in Hollywood since I’ve been here, I’d be richer than Elon Musk.
There are opportunities. There will always BE opportunities. And, as writers, your opportunities increase in relation to how good your script is. So focus on THAT. And when you finish that, focus on getting your script out to as many people as you can. If it’s good, something good will come of it. I’m not saying you’ll sell it for 2 million dollars. But I promise you that if it’s good AND you get it out there, something good will come of it.
Okay, now for something completely off the beaten path. I’m finding that Chat GPT is quite good at suggesting movies. You just have to provide it with extremely specific criteria for what you’re looking for. This is the prompt I gave it last night: “This is going to be really difficult for you. I have seen almost every movie ever. However, I do have some weak points. Pre-1990, I have some gaps. And there are non-mainstream foreign movies I haven’t seen. I’m looking to watch a movie that’s not too serious. Something that will leave me feeling good. Give me some suggestions.”
It then spat out 20 movies, 16 of which I’d never seen before and 12 I’d never heard of before. The only problem with the suggestions was that a few of the foreign movies that looked good weren’t on any streaming services. But I finally settled on a 1978 movie called “The Silent Partner.” It’s a Canadian thriller. I loved that because Canada making a thriller movie may be the biggest oxymoron on planet earth.
The movie follows a bank teller at a Canadian mall who stumbles across a discarded bank withdrawal slip in the garbage which says, “I have a gun. Quietly hand me all the money.” He deduces that a potential robber chickened out at the last second, but that he’ll be back to try again.
So the next day, he covertly puts the majority of the money from his station in a bag. Sure enough, the robber comes back (he’s the mall’s Santa Claus) with a new note, demanding all the money. The teller gives him “all” the money (except for the money he smuggled away for himself) and the robber runs away. It’s the perfect crime. The bank just assumes that the robber took it all.
However, because of local news coverage of the robbery, the robber realizes what happened. It’s reported that 50,000 dollars was stolen but he only received 20,000. He now sets his sights on the teller, determined to get the remainder of his dough. At first, the teller is intimidated. But, eventually, he’s tired of being bullied and goes on the offensive.
I’m not going to pretend like The Silent Partner is some cinematic masterpiece. But it’s fun enough and weird enough that it’ll keep you entertained. The writing can be good but also silly. The teller collects exotic fish. Why?! There’s literally no reason. It doesn’t inform his character at all. It’s clearly something the writer thought would add “dimension” to the character. And there’s a scene where the bad guy beats up another character for literally no reason other than to make you hate him. You’re watching this and thinking to yourself, “What kind of crazy sh*t went on in the 70s to make people write this???” Still, it’s a $3.50 Amazon Prime rental. If you watch it, let me know what you think.
Okay, since the Scriptshadow Newsletter is still on the fritz (I continue to search for a mass e-mail app that’s easy to use), I’ll offer two SCRIPT CONSULTATION DEALS right here on the site. I’m offering HALF-OFF script notes for two people only. One from the U.S. and one from anywhere outside the U.S. These will go quick so e-mail me right away! (carsonreeves1@gmail.com).
