Fox Searchlight's 'Amelia': How did it make it onto the runway?

I know that all of America was queasily captivated last week by the bizarre "is it real or isn't it" Balloon Boy escapade. But here in Hollywood, heads are scratching over an equally puzzling mystery: How did Fox Searchlight, which has easily the best box-office best batting average of any specialty film company in the business, get stuck with a turkey like "Amelia"?

A cloyingly earnest historical drama based on the exploits of Amelia Earhart that arrives in 800 theaters Friday, the film features Hilary Swank as the daring aviatrix who suddenly disappeared in 1937 over the central Pacific while trying to fly around the world.

The reviews have been awful, with the film so far having earned a paltry 20 from Rotten Tomatoes. Entertainment Weekly's Lisa Schwarzbaum described the movie as "square, still and earthbound" while Variety's Justin Chang calls it a "dismayingly superficial" film full of "inspirational platitudes."

Meanwhile, the box-office tracking for the film, directed by Mira Nair, has been grim. According to numbers from the OTX tracking service, younger moviegoers have zero desire to see the movie. And even older moviegoers, who would normally make up the largest segment of potential moviegoers, are unenthusiastic. The film's "definite interest" numbers among over-30 females, the niche most likely to see the film, were a mediocre 19%, even less than the number of over-30 women eager to see "Saw VI."

Searchlight, which normally gives its films a platform release, has clearly decided it should get as much as it can out of the movie as quickly as possible before the bad buzz spreads, hence the 800-screen release this weekend. But how did Searchlight get caught holding the bag with such a stinker? No one is talking for the record, but my sources close to the production say the company made a rare misstep -- it got involved with a production it didn't control.

As it turns out, most of the funding for "Amelia's" roughly $40-million budget came from Ted Waitt,  co-founder of Gateway computers, who had a personal fascination with the Earhart saga. Just before the film went into production last year, Searchlight acquired worldwide distribution rights, putting up a minority stake in the budget and footing the bill for the film's marketing expenses. At the time, judging from the script co-written by Ron Bass and Anna Hamilton Phelan, the studio felt "Amelia" could be a historical drama with the kind of uplift and emotional intensity of a film like "Out of Africa." Searchlight also had strong relationships with the film's talent, having released Nair's "The Namesake" and Swank's "Boys Don't Cry."

But movies are all about execution, not just expectations, and by the time Nair delivered a finished film, it was clear that she'd missed the mark, at least when it came to uplift and emotional intensity. Searchlight still believes it can woo over-50 women into seeing the film, even with its lousy reviews. Its execs make the argument that older women still came out in droves to see period films like "The Other Boleyn Girl"  and "The Changeling," which were poorly reviewed but had strong female characters that drove older women into the multiplexes. However, a comparison to "The Changeling" seems like a big stretch, since it had the cachet of both Angelina Jolie and director Clint Eastwood, not to mention considerably better reviews (earning a 61 at Rotten Tomatoes). "The Other Boleyn Girl" is a better model, but it only made $26.8 million in its domestic release.

Searchlight believes that if it could do a similar mid-20s number in the U.S. it could come out OK, especially if it could attract a similar percent of moviegoers around the globe. I think they're being overly optimistic. Judging from the reviews, "Amelia" will end up being another in a long list of examples of historical films shunned by today's moviegoers, who appear less interested than ever in movies whose stories are firmly rooted in the past.

Comments

[Todd G.]

Why didn't they market it to the James Cameron "Titanic" crowd? $1.8 billion or whatever box office for a historical movie ain't peanuts.

[Scott Larson]

Quoting the closing thoughts:

"Judging from the reviews, "Amelia" will end up being another in a long list of examples of historical films shunned by today's moviegoers, who appear less interested than ever in movies whose stories are firmly rooted in the past."

This.. makes no sense. The entirety of the article establishes that this is a poorly made film being marketed and dumped as such. To then conclude that audiences don't want to see it because it is based on a historical event is absurd. I think people do have a genuine appreciation for history but like anything else if what you're trying to convey is being delivered badly then they'll just tune it out.

So what is the real opinion here? Are people not going to see this movie because they're slack-jawed fools only interested in the shiny new, or are people not going to see this movie because it's simply another clunker even the people who made it want to forget? For me personally it is most definitely the latter.

[Phil]

Seriously? You pay attention to reviews? Rotten Tomatoes? It's possible "Amelia" won't do well for reasons of cultural disinterests, but that's on us, not the creators. If the film doesn't perform financially, it won't be due to quality of execution or performances. Fortunately, movies are enough of a betting business for projects like "Amelia" to make it to screen and if it tanks despite its quality, well that's our failing as an audience, isn't it? Let the "Saw 6es" of the world subsidize taking a chance on films like this. If every greenlight decision were purely market-driven, movies would die from monoculture. "Changeling," by the way, was the best movie of its year, reviewers be damned.

[JR Jake]

Anytime you have the caliber of acting that Swank and Gere bring to the screen you will get all-star performances. The Amelia Earhart story is definitely an interesting one, but to do it justice and tell the whole story would be very lengthy. I am sure there was a lot of clips on the floor by the time they finished with the end product.

Not to say this will be anything terrific in box office sales, the sheer enjoyment of watching these two fine actors makes for an enjoyable afternoon, especially considering the movies we have been blessed with this year as it is.

[Bwaco]

I don't know if this has much relevance, but there seems to be tremendous interest in historical aircraft and aviation history. In our humble biplane ride business at Santa Monica, we find out every day just how many people are enchanted by the history of aviation. Our customers will certainly want to see Amelia, especially since we fly the same model of biplane seen in the film (http://www.blackandwhitebiplane.com). So, from our perspective there certainly seems to be a substantial and fundamental interest in things, people and events historic.

[Emily Selden]

Funny, the previews look excellent. It is a good thing I don't listen to critics. It is also equally telling that I am about 98% right about whether something will be a hit or not. Perhaps "inspirational platitudes" is exactly what people need right now. I guess we will see if my record holds out. I don't think it will be a blockbuster, but I think it will do well.

[really]

OmG! YES! Changeling was one of the BEST Movies of 2008. I didn't watch it until recently and I was shocked at how good it was.

[Dznts]

Nothing to do with history. Girl power has jumped the shark. The trailer makes it look like a feminist feel good flick with a lead known for those types of films. It comes off like it has a chip on its shoulder or an axe to grind, and I think people are sick of this type of preachy crap.

[mojomofo]

Your last statement makes no sense
"Judging from the reviews, "Amelia" will end up being another in a long list of examples of historical films shunned by today's moviegoers, who appear less interested than ever in movies whose stories are firmly rooted in the past."

What? You said the film sucks...that's why they won't watch it. Read before you post.

[Keith]

Nice summary of the situation Fox S got into, with the key being control... studios know their business but if they lose control this is what happens. It reminds me of the second Star Wars trilogy... once Lucas had total unquestioned creative control things suffered.