![]( "Hosted by imgur.com")
“World War Z” will in all likelihood be looked back on as an important turning point in the narrative of bad buzz prematurely equating to a flop. It's an interesting case study for studios trying to turn back the tide on troubled productions. These days, with transparency and information as available as it is, bad buzz can severely hurt a film. Look at “Gangster Squad” (delayed and then had its ending reshot), “Battleship” (delayed, looked like Michael Bay at sea) or “John Carter” (delayed, had a title changes, suffered from a terrible marketing campaign). These are three recent films that only reinforced the traditional narrative -- these movies are troubled, therefore they’re going to suck.
But Brad Pitt’s intense, thinking man’s zombie movie proved to be a big hit this weekend, becoming the star’s biggest box-office opening to date and coming in second only after the four-quadrant friendly “Monsters University.” Yet, somehow, “World War Z,” with its whispers of director/actor fights, rewrites, reshoots and a generally cursed production, managed to outlive its snakebitten reputation. By following the conventional wisdom of the Hollywood narrative, “World War Z,” should have been, by all rights, a huge and expensive, colossal flop. Instead, it’s already over $100 million worldwide, looking like it will have strong legs and while it’s doubtful it will recoup, Paramount is already looking at potential sequels.
Part of the film’s rehabilitation was a canny transparency job. Letting in reporters like Vanity Fair and Entertainment Weekly was part of allowing the media in early, and this made for good, juicy copy and high awareness. Secondly, Paramount held early screenings for critics and pop-up screenings with Brad Pitt all over the country which started good word of mouth buzz. With the film defying the odds, we thought we’d look back at five movies that survived their bad buzz and another five that followed their trajectories right into the bottom of the box-office dumpster. Keep in mind, this isn’t simply movies that endured a difficult production, but rather those whose difficulties spilled over into the public and had to overcome the odds or simply pay the piper.
5 Troubled Film Productions That Overcame Bad Buzz
“Titanic” (1997)How Did It Begin: Having already directed "The Terminator" parts 1 and 2, "Aliens," "The Abyss" and "True Lies," James Cameron’s films were becoming bigger and bigger and a challenge was something the hubristic director could never live down. Seeing the “Titanic” story as the Mount Everest of shipwrecks, Cameron was soon hooked, writing a screenplay and making this romance disaster his next project.
What Went Wrong? Cameron’s always been the proto-Michael Bay of directors, loud and demanding. And while directing the epic scope of “Titanic,” Cameron lost his cool more than once. While effects were important, massive sets were built (one costing $40 million) with thousands of extras making for an extremely big operation to manage. But Cameron even had to film the infamous Kate Winslet nude scene first because many of these massive sets weren’t ready when filming began. Water played a huge and dangerous part as well, with actors fearing for their lives during the long and labored sequences when the Titanic sank. Cameron ran an “militaresque” operation to keep the movie on schedule and production, but the film’s budget still ballooned to over $200 million -- the most expensive film ever made at that time (this was also minus the marketing and promotion). While Cameron was unapologetic about his demanding style, his tactics backfired and one evening an angry crew member put PCP into the soup that Cameron and several other crewmembers ate, sending several people to the hospital.
When The Press Got Hold Of It: With a release pushed from July to December, it didn’t take long for the press to get ahold of the disaster-in-the-making production of Titanic. Entertainment Weekly did a cover story on its various woes in November of 1997 and much of Hollywood was seemingly just waiting for the film to fail. Cameron battled with Fox over the spiraling budgets and running time and struggled to get it down to a manageable 3 hours (3 hrs 14 minutes was the final cut). Even the press in 1997 knew the film had to be a megahit just to break even. Cameron threatened to quit if Fox changed a hair on the film’s head and then said they’d have to kill him if they wanted to see that happen. Rumor had it there was a razor blade taped to the editing suite with a note attached that read, “only use if film sucks.” "There's no other way to look at it. It's a great battle. A battle between Business and Aesthetics," Cameron told EW.
What Happened In The End? Defying the odds and then some, the David and Goliath story of Cameron vs. the studio vs. the skeptical media world couldn’t have been written any bigger and better. “Titanic” went on to become the highest grossing film of all time and it held that record for 12 years until it was finally bested by Cameron’s next epic, “Avatar.” "Titanic" would sweep the Oscars the following year, earning 14 nominations, winning 11 including Best Picture and Best Director. Cameron’s unwavering vision had been validated to the hilt, but it he would wait almost 10 years before he began working on “Avatar” in earnest.
“Avatar” (2009)How Did It Begin: After years of deep-sea diving, and directing undersea exploratory documentaries like "Aliens of the Deep," and "Ghosts of the Abyss,” “Avatar” was announced in 2005, then known as “Project 880” -- and Cameron was envisioning a trilogy almost from the beginning. Melding his love for science fiction, environmentalism and technology, Cameron saw "Avatar" as a digital revolutionary step forward, but delayed the film for several years so technology would catch up.
What Went Wrong? Not that much, as the press or public wasn't really concerned other than the fact that “Avatar” shot in 2007 and wouldn’t arrive in theaters until the end of December 2009. Buy even so the press and even the public were largely kept in the dark, and there was nary a set photo or any indication of how the film's production was going until very late in the game. And this perhaps was by design after Cameron’s “Titanic” experience.
When The Press Got Hold Of It: Similarly delayed (due in the summer, eventually released at Christmas), as the media is wont to do whispers began with the impatient speculation of “what could be wrong here?” “Avatar” was held under lock and key for months, but when the first trailer arrived -- concurrent with a 15 minute sizzle reel at a specially ticketed event on giant Imax screens around the planet to build buzz -- much of the press was dismayed, asking, “We waited two years for this?” The New York Times wrote an article about the mixed press reception and even quoted The Playlist, with our post saying: “This is supposed to be the game changer this year? Maybe it does look astonishing in 3D and on the big screen, but it practically looks comical in this Internet-trailer form.” Various movie websites likened it to disasters like “Delgo” and “Dungeons & Dragons” and the bad buzz began, even spawning Hitler’s infamous reaction to the “bad trailer” news.
What Happened In The End?“Avatar” went on to become the highest grossing film of all time. $2.8 billion and counting and it doesn’t look like that record’s going to be eclipsed any time soon, though Cameron is working on two sequels simultaneously. Nominated for 9 Academy Awards (including Picture and Director), the narrative shifted to Cameron and his ex wife Kathryn Bigelow's awards season film, “The Hurt Locker.” Suffice to say that little Iraq war indie took the big prizes and “Avatar” had to be satisfied with three technical awards.
5 Troubled Film Productions That Didn’t Overcome Their Bad Buzz
“Heaven’s Gate” (1980)How Did It Begin: Given the critical and commercial success of "The Deer Hunter" -- five Academy Awards, including Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Supporting Actor for Christopher Walken -- Michael Cimino was basically given a blank check for his next ambitious project.
What Went Wrong? Giving a hubris-filled, feeling-infallible director carte blanche and letting him run wild with it. We’ve detailed a lot of the production problems on “Heaven’s Gate” here, but the short version is that it essentially boils down to a toxic combination of ego and cockiness. Cimino spent insane amounts of money on the dumbest kind of expenditures like rebuilding massive, entire sets, costing thousands and thousands of dollars, simply because he didn't like the way two houses were built next to each other. (Yes that really happened). Endless retakes trying to make everything thusly perfect, also helped the cost balloon way over budget, as did an extensive post-production and editing process.
When The Press Got Hold Of It: Cimino previewed a work print for executives at United Artists that reportedly ran a staggering five hours and twenty-five minutes, and word of its overages were already beginning to trickle out. The 1980 premiere in November was by all accounts a flat out failure. New York Times critic Vincent Canby panned the film, calling it "an unqualified disaster," comparing it to "a forced four-hour walking tour of one's own living room." Suffice to say its idyllic pace and long, take-its-time sprawl wasn’t really widely appreciated.
What Happened In The End? One of the biggest and most notorious box-office bombs of all time, “Heaven’s Gate” became the poster child for film productions run amok and is seen as being part of the downfall of the short lived ‘70s American New Wave (by the time the ‘80s hit, all these young directors were having major flops, some like Cimino, Bogdanovich, et al, never recovered). Those disastrous previews effectively shut down the film fast and while a “director’s cut” was screened a year later it too was panned with Roger Ebert calling it, a “scandalous cinematic waste.” The movie was also notoriously responsible for the downfall of United Artists movie studio and it spawned “Final Cut,” the ironically titled book by Steven Bach, VP in charge of production of UA at the time, wherein he lamented the film’s problems and giving his director free reign. That said, a recent restoration that screened at the Venice Film Festival and was issued on the Criterion Collection has helped boost its critical standing, though it still remains a commercial trainwreck.
“Terminator Salvation” (2009)How Did It Begin: Someone with the ill-conceived idea of a sort of quasi future prequel of the “Terminator” franchise as directed by McG.
What Went Wrong? Mostly everything, though convincing both Christian Bale to star (or co-star? part of the movie's problem) and Jonathan Nolan to rewrite the film on set were admittedly valiant attempts to make some smart creative choices.
When The Press Got Hold Of It: There were lawsuits in pre-production that didn’t bode well, but nothing could prepare the press or public for the very nasty and expletive-filled outburst that was surreptitiously recorded, and then subsequently leaked, of Christian Bale ripping into cinematographer Shane Hurlbut for walking on set during a take (admittedly, this is total greenhorne move). McG tried to take the blame for it, saying he had overworked and exhausted Bale that day, but the damage seemed to be done.
What Happened In The End?‘Salvation’ happened. The truth is Bale and Hurlbut squashed their beef quickly and shot for a month afterwards, but perhaps it was an overall indication of Bale’s frustration of working on a movie that obviously didn’t seem to be clicking at any point of the production. The proof of that panned out in the movie: a mostly humorless, drab, unfun spin on the “Terminator” franchise that somehow didn’t kill the series entirely (a fifth iteration is in the works with producers Megan and David Ellison and Arnold Schwarzenegger back on board).
"Waterworld" (1995)How Did It Begin: A script by David Twohy was conceived as a kind of waterlogged version of "The Road Warrior," with an earth consumed by water and Kevin Costner and his "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves" director Kevin Reynolds teamed up to bring the script to life.
What Went Wrong? Literally everything. Movies shot on water are notoriously difficult and "Waterworld" was no exception: it almost instantly got behind schedule and stayed there. Costner nearly drowned on at least one occasion and his stunt double was nearly lost at sea. The script was constantly going through overhauls, with "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" writer Joss Whedon being brought out to the Hawaii location, an experience he later described as "seven weeks of hell." The relationship between Costner and Reynolds frayed to the point that Reynolds stormed off the movie more than two weeks before principle photography was scheduled to wrap (rumor has it Costner directed those two weeks). The budget ballooned to $175 million, which made it the most expensive movie of all time (at the time). People began referring to it as "Kevin's Gate" or "Fishtar," in reference to those other infamous Hollywood bombs.
When The Press Got Hold Of It: In September 1994 a damning portrait of the production was issued in the Los Angeles Times that described the cost overages and organizational turmoil that had swallowed "Waterworld." From then on out it was the butt of many Hollywood jokes and the basis for endless conjecture and rumor. At the time the piece ran, the film was "around $135 million and is already two weeks behind schedule." Sources for the piece described the production as "a runaway train under water." Things didn't get better, with every new revelation spoken about in hushed, can-you-believe-it? tones.
What Happened In The End? While "Waterworld" was by no means a smash it did end up making its money back after you factor in things like home video and the merchandising drummed up by the long running "Waterworld" stunt show at Universal Studios. Some critics (including Roger Ebert) even expressed a begrudging appreciation and the film has become something of a cult favorite in later years. There's even plans for some kind of Syfy Channel remake. Bafflingly, Costner followed up "Waterworld" with another dreary post-apocalyptic sci-fi movie called "The Postman" (which he also directed), which fared much worse than "Waterworld," and eventually he and Reynolds made amends and then crafted last year's great cable miniseries "Hatfields and McCoys."
Source.
