In one of the more extraordinary box-office stories of the year, writer-director John Lee Hancock’s movie about Baltimore Ravens lineman Michael Oher -- who as a homeless black teen was taken in and nurtured by a well-off, churchgoing white couple -- nearly toppled the smash sequel "The Twilight Saga: New Moon" at multiplexes in both films' second weekend of release. Its ticket sales grew by 18% -- the first time this year that a movie in wide release saw its domestic gross grow on its second weekend -- while those for the teen vampire drama plummeted by 70%.This is a huge hit, extremely rare for a movie that opened on as many screens as it did to increase B.O. its second week of release. Here's one stat why:
"The Blind Side" has surpassed $100 million in domestic sales, with $200 million- plus now considered a certainty by executives at distributor Warner Bros. Independent studio Alcon Entertainment financed the movie at a cost of just $35 million.
On its first weekend, nearly 60% of attendees were women, who also turned out in droves to see Bullock in this summer's hit romantic comedy "The Proposal."But apart from the strong, true story high-concept -- rich white family takes in African-American youth, supporting him as he goes through high school, then college, then the NFL -- what is going on here?
But it appears that the audience for "The Blind Side" broadened after the holiday, driven by extraordinary word of mouth (it was only the second film this year, along with "Up," to garner an A-plus grade from moviegoers, according to market research firm CinemaScore).
"We saw a lot of families coming together over the holiday weekend," said Bagby.
Hancock, whose previous movie "The Alamo" was a critical and commercial dud, said he was always confident the story would have wide appeal, particularly because he labored not to make its protagonists -- Bullock plays the Memphis decorator, Leigh Anne Tuohy, who rescues Oher -- cut-out caricatures."They're a Christian family that's portrayed as normal, which Hollywood doesn't have a great track record with." True that. A lot of my Christian friends complain about the horrible stereotyping of people of faith in the movies. But in this screenplay, written by Hancock, he took the time and effort to draft characters with multiple layers, including their own flaws:
"I felt the movie would play as well in New York as it would in Portland as in Tallahassee," Hancock said. "There may be some aspects to the real life of the Tuohys -- they're a Christian family that's portrayed as normal, which Hollywood doesn't have a great track record with. Hollywood tends to be very lazy in its portrayal of a lot of would-be stereotypes. Whether it's Southern Christian families or New York cab drivers.
"There's an easy, lazy way to do it, which is, just rely on stereotypes and throw it into theaters. I hope the movie dashed that stereotype in some ways, that Leigh Anne has to be the Church Lady from 'Saturday Night Live' or something."One big lesson here for us as screenwriters: Dig deep into our characters so that their unique qualities and voice emerge, enabling us to imbue them with life, spirit, and soul.
Terry Mattingly, a religion columnist for Scripps Howard News Service and the director of the Christian-oriented Washington Journalism Center, believes that "The Blind Side" is working with audiences because the film's Christian back story is neither gratuitous nor didactic.
"What makes a movie like this important to me is that it doesn't slap people in the face with religion," Mattingly said. "Most films from Hollywood that involve faith take out all the details -- it's just vague and mushy or it's negative religious stereotypes.
"But 'The Blind Side' is a real movie. And then it has another factor: showing respect for religious motivations and emotions. So you have people lining up."
Who's seen The Blind Side? What's your reaction to the movie?
Posts
6 comments:
I haven't seen it. Probably won't - no offense, too busy - but it reminds me of a disconnect I see in screenwriting. It's too personal for too many people. Screenwriters can't care about theme or culture but only the technical aspects of good character-dialog (yes the "-" means they can't be separated) and dramatic situations.
Sometimes they can consist of tension at the dinner table with a clash of values or a humility based on disbelief or estrangement.
Funny enough I just sold a short to a film maker that was based on distancing myself from my "particular life view."
It really enabled me to concentrate on the cinema and not my feelings about the characters' life view.
That's what WikiPedia and Google are for.
Well said Christian H.
That very disconnect you mention is as plain as day in most of the scripts I read. People are so busy molding and crafting and paradigming and plotting, desperate to make that 'perfect sale,' they (possibly inadvertently) lose the humanity. Lord knows I'm as guilty of that as anybody.
Trying to bridge that gap in my work lately. Failing mostly, succeeding occasionally. It's uncomfortable and disquieting to carve your heart out with a dull blade and upload it into Final Draft, y'know?
Exactly. This is a job - though not like many others. It's flexibility that enables successful assignments where you have little to no control over the story, only the content.
I haven't seen it, so take my comments accordingly, but I'm a little disappointed though not surprised by its success. Not sure the success is due to original characters - 'Precious' has that too, right? Thinking the success may be due to 1) that wacky American prejudice toward upbeat films; 2)the familiar white savior of black people theme; and 3)the sincere Christian thing, which, frankly, scares the heck out of me!
@michele: I don't think you have to be a cynic to wonder honestly -- and perhaps correctly -- that one psychological component which could be driving white audiences to the movie is the desire to believe that most white people, especially in the South and especially Christians, have managed to move beyond a racist heritage. Perhaps, too, the need for this reinforcement has been elevated due to some of derogatory and often blatantly racist language directed toward Barack Obama.
Don't get me wrong. I don't think that is the primary lure of The Blind Side. The big entertainment elements -- football, feel good, underdog, FOOW (Fish Out Of Water), Great American Family, true story, high concept -- are likely the biggest draws to the movie. But given the current nature of public discourse re race and racial politics, I suspect some of that has translated into additional motivation to see The Blind Side.
Scott, can you explain that more? I'm American, but have been outside the country for the last 7 years, though of course I kept up with the election and its aftermath. But how does The Blind Side play into the national discourse on race? And, especially, what does it do that Precious doesn't? Finally - can't a film in which the poor black kid is rescued and set on the right path by the well-meaning white parents with the 'right' values be perceived by some as subtly racist?
Post a Comment