Kicking Ass?

Earlier today Cinematical.com asked if Kick Ass was a success or failure. Before we actually answer that question (with a question), let's look at what Cinematical posted:

As you've already seen, Kick-Ass didn't exactly set fire to the box office the way many of its superhero predecessors have. It barely opened at #1 with $19.8 million, which isn't too shabby, but it's hardly the epic, groundbreaking blockbuster some may have expected.

But was it truly a failure? Kick-Ass was financed out of Matthew Vaughn's own pockets (studios refused to touch it due to content), and was made for a budget of approximately $30 million. It's now made $37 million worldwide. It will make its marketing budget back, and then some. For an indie film based on a creator-owned comic (and one without a major fanbase or instant character recognition), that may be considered a major success.

Yet Kick-Ass didn't take the world by storm, as expected by the online buzz and hype. (Remember, Kick-Ass was supposed to kill superhero movies as of a couple of weeks ago.) It scored a 77% on Rotten Tomatoes, it's been at the center of controversy, and it's been the subject of countless articles, but it couldn't scare up a more enthusiastic response at the box office. Remember, audiences will supposedly eat up anything to do with superheroes and comic books, yet Kick-Ass can't make it past the $20 million mark. It's not unlike the lukewarm response to Watchmen, which suggests audiences will only eat up the superheroes they recognize and love.

So what can we take away from this? Lets ask one question first: Was this a truly independent film? Vaughn financed it himself, not a studio, so I would say that yes, it was; albeit a high budget one with Nicolas Cage. However, it wasn't self distributed, so some would argue that its not truly independent in that sense, but you know what? A studio didn't finance it, so the production was independent indeed.

This brings me to my bigger question- THE question: Can you call something a success or failure from just its opening weekend? Isn't something a success if it makes its money back and more over time; especially if the film is actually good? (I have yet to see Kick Ass)

Success and Failure are two ends of a spectrum that changes from person to person; eye of the beholder, etc. In this instance it seems that Hollywood is doing the beholding. To Hollywood, opening weekend is still the be all, end all, of success (how easily they forget DVD still has yet to come until its time for them to put it on DVD, then the debate starts all over again).

What about films that have weak starts and gain more and more success through word of mouth; films like Once, Juno, Bubba Ho-Tep, etc? Ah, because those were considered to be "more independent" by the mainstream media (though Juno is again debatable in some circles). If a film like Once (made for a "tiny" budget of 175k) made 20 million its opening weekend, it would become a real success story and would be used as a vantage point for indie success like Paranormal Activity or Little Miss Sunshine (which seem to be the only two "independent films" in mainstream America's vernacular).

I'm just going to be honest here and give a piece of advice to my fellow indie filmmakers; frak this system. This is a horrible grading system when it comes to our work. MY idea of successful filmmaking is that of being a successful artist; not millions, but being able to continue working and supporting myself as an artist. If you're really in it for the money- please, just get out. Yes, I know there is the potential for a lot of money to be made in this industry, and maybe you might even get to have some of it (and all the more power to you), but if you successfully make an indie film from start to finish; as in you hired a cast and crew, fed them, PAID them, shot the film, edited the film and its good, consider yourself a success. I know this may be preaching to the choir, but... DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW HARD IT IS TO MAKE A FILM? Even just one with a budget of 5k? If you're able to make your money back and profit from that same film, consider yourself an even greater success.

Listen, I understand that this model is pretty much all that people pay attention to, but please, don't burden yourself with trying to form a project to conform to it; if you do you'll only drive yourself crazy. Admit to yourself that there's a chance your film may only have a niche audience and be OKAY with that. There are so many wonderful and beautiful films out there that you haven't even heard of that are some top quality, amazing things; or even just plain, good fun- a film that doesn't SUCK. I come across films like this all the time, and a lot of the time not only are they made for little money, but they've already made it back or are on their way to. The right media outlets are covering them.

So ask yourself this question: how much money do you really need to be satisfied?

No, seriously, ask yourself THIS question(s); if YOU made Kick-Ass and you made your money back, wouldn't you be happy? Wouldn't you consider that to be a success? Would you care what anyone thought about your box office (as opposed to your ART) if you considered it be successful; if it had fans; a following?

The Ballad Of "Black Dynamite" And How A Film Got Lost

In October 2009, a modestly budgeted blaxploitation send-up called "Black Dynamite" launched onto screens and stayed there for about a week. After an opening weekend gross of roughly $131,000, averaging out to about $1000 per screen, the film's distributor quickly pulled it from theaters despite it gaining positive buzz in the press. Thankfully, however, the film's quick stint in theaters will be rectified by an expedited February release on DVD, and its internet buzz is growing stronger despite the studio's complete lack of effort in advertising the film. The story behind the making and release of the hilarious "Black Dynamite" is a harrowing tale of niche appeal falling flat on its face, which, oddly enough, sealed its fate towards becoming a cult classic.

More Dolemite than Shaft, "Black Dynamite" parodies the worst kind of blaxploitation by lovingly recreating it. The movie is presented as if it were a recently discovered gem uncovered out of some dusty studio basement. Kung-fu fighting, hundred-dollar suit wearing, hyper-sexualized former CIA agent Black Dynamite isn't played by modern actor Michael Jai White but by all-star running back Forante Jones. It doesn't simply spoof blaxploitation; it is blaxploitation, down to every last detail. Actors flub their lines, stunts go wrong and boom mics swing into the frame. Everything, from the dialogue to the special effects, is rooted in the 1970s. Unlike, the Tarantino/Rodriguez financial flop "Grindhouse," which used digital manipulation to age its footage, "Black Dynamite" director Scott Sanders actually used 16mm film stock to achieve the look of a film that's been rotting away in the vault of a bankrupted studio for over thirty years.

In an interview with The AV Club, White, who co-wrote the film with Sanders, railed off the scenes the movie needed to stand alongside its blaxploitation brethren: "There's the conspiracy theory. There's white people depicted poolside. There's the chase scene. There's the unusually high death count, with people shooting people in the streets with absolutely no regard for the police."

A long time fan of blaxploitation movies, White came up with the idea for "Black Dynamite" while listening to James Brown's "SuperBad," which was also the original title of the film before a certain other movie snatched the title. White contacted Sanders and the two of them cobbled together the idea of what eventually became "Black Dynamite" in the form of a $500 YouTube trailer that mixed footage of White in character interacting with scenes lifted from various 70s blaxploitation films.

The trailer allowed White and Sanders to have something to show investors, and they eventually raised enough money to write and shoot the full version of the film. The viral trailer spread unexpectedly on the internet, "It started off on a Japanese website and then all of a sudden one day in June it just spread." Sanders told CHUD in an interview, "And we were like "wow we haven't finished the movie yet." Eventually the finished film premiered at Sundance to wild praise, and the movie was sold within twelve hours. And that's when things started to go downhill.

After Sundance, the buzz around "Black Dynamite" started to die off. The film's outrageous trailer never saw distribution in theaters, ads never appeared on television, and aside from a few sub-par efforts for the film to go viral (a Black Dynamite yourself feature on Facebook, fightsmackintheorphanage.org) it mostly went unheralded and unsung. The film's editor and composer, Adrian Younge, explained their situation to LI News: "It's just one of those films that…the studio's afraid of it. They felt that it was just too much of a niche film. So, I mean, there wasn't much that we could do… Because it's a low-budget film, we don't have that much money for marketing and all that stuff. It was just one of those things where we hoped that the public would just spread the word of mouth, you know?"

Well. It didn't.

But the story isn't over for "Black Dynamite." Most enduring cult features flopped in the cinema, in a weird way it's almost a right of passage. "Office Space" barely took in $10 million during its full theatrical run, and it's a similar story for movies like "Army of Darkness" or "Pootie Tang," another unsung blaxploitation spoof. While it's yet to be seen if "Black Dynamite" will ever reach the cult status of those slow burn success stories, the movie is certainly funny and wild enough to gain a massive following. While "Black Dynamite" is far from perfect (its appeal begins to taper off during its belabored, over-the-top climax), it's the type of imperfect film that strikes that key balance between broad and weird, and cool and dorky that cult audiences salivate over.

 

Even though the film failed to find an audience at the box office, its buzz lives on. Aside from the future DVD release, White and Sanders have both reported that an animated version of the movie is in the works for Cartoon Network that will be headed up by the creators of "The Boondocks." No official word from the network yet, but White seems to think it come out sometime next year.