January in Horror

There is a lot to be said about the Box Office and horror.  The horror genre is always looked down upon despite the fact that it is a genre in which Studios spent a tenth of the budget of the more popular “A” films (or films with over bloated budgets and big stars) and they don’t need to make a lot at the Box Office to turn a profit.  The old saying is that if a film makes three times its production budget then it can be considered a hit but most critics and Box Office watchers forget this and continuously misread Box Office numbers to label low earning horror films as Box Office duds.  I only say this as January, to many Box Office watchers appears to be a bad month for horror films, but when you analyze the actual numbers January may not be as healthy and robust as last year (when Mama, A Haunted House, Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters, and Texas Chainsaw 3D dominated) but it wasn’t a complete disaster.  Last month saw the release of Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones, Devil’s Due, and I, Frankenstein.  We will take them one at a time.

Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones is a spin-off of the popular Paranormal Activity franchise (the fifth film so far) which has been a huge International money maker (similar to the Saw franchise before it).  The previous four previous films have an average Int’l Box Office of $180 million each with an average domestic take of $87 million each against an average production budget of $3.25 million (with the first film costing an estimated $15,000).  Now what does all of this really mean?  It means that on average each one of the films have made over 10 times their production budget making them some of the most profitable films in any franchise in the history of horror.  What does this mean for The Marked Ones?  The Marketed Ones had a production budget of $5 million and as of the beginning of February has grossed $32.3 million Domestic & $53.9 million Foreign (with a combined Int’l of $86.2 million).   So after 5 weeks of release Int’l it has made almost seven times its production budget domestic and over ten times foreign which is better than 90% of all the other “A” films released last year.  To keep everything in perspective last year’s highest grossing film The Hunger Games: Catching Fire grossed $859.6 million Int’l which is only six times its budget, so, if you are only by actual figures The Market Ones did better than Catching Fire.

Next up is Devil’s Due.  Now a lot of people will argue that Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones had a built in audience which is why it did the business it did,  Devil’s Due has no built in audience and no stars to help market it.  This film had a production budget of $7 million and has only been in release for two weeks so it still has some Box Office legs and is just now hitting the foreign markets.  It has thus far grossed $14.7 million domestic and $9.5 million foreign (with a combined Int’l of $24.2 million).  It has already made back twice its production budget domestically will most definitely reach that amount by the end of the month in foreign gross.  A comparable “A” film would be Man of Steel which grossed $668.04 million Int’l on a production budget of $225 million which means that it only made three times its production budget and is considered a hit.  If you look at it just by the numbers Devil’s Due made 3.5 times its production budget (going by the Int’l gross) which makes it more profitable than Man of Steel and it still has a Box Office life to do more business.

The final film in my analysis is I, Frankenstein which was released a week ago so it is just hitting the market.  Its production budget is a massive $65 million making it a “B” movie.  It has grossed $14.5 million domestic and $16.2 million foreign (for a combine Int’l of $30.7 million).  This is not a very promising outlook by the Box Office watchers point of view.  An “A” film to compare it to is last year’s Pacific Rim which had a production budget of $190 million and had a domestic gross of $101.8 million and foreign gross of $309.2 million (with a combined Int’l of $411 million).  Its first weekend gross was $90.4 million Int’l.  What this means is that Pacific Rim grossed 48% of its production budget on the first weekend whereas I, Frankenstein grossed 47% of its production budget putting them on par with one another. 

What does this all mean?

The horror genre is one that is given less money, no name stars (most of the time), a smaller marketing budget, and a release date that is usually dead for most films.  It should be noted that Man of Steel, Pacific Rim, and The Hunger Games: Catching Fire were all released during peak Box Office months whereas January is consistently year-to-year one of the lower Box Office grossing months of the year.  Box Office watchers and critics forget that the horror genre is one of the most consistently profitable genres year-to-year because of the low production budgets therefore they don’t need to make blockbuster figures to turn a profit.  As you can see by the numbers all three of the January releases have outperformed some of the biggest films of last year.  To call these films duds puts a harmful light on these releases.  They may not be making the blockbuster numbers of “A” films but then again they shouldn’t have to and they shouldn’t need to.  Whether a film is considered profitable or not is related to how much it costs to produce and the combined production cost of all three films discussed here is less than any one of the three blockbusters mentioned.

So for those of you paying attention to the critics and Box Office watchers out there telling you that horror is doing horrible this year, take another look and consider the reality and not the perception that horror films should be doing blockbuster business.  Horror flourishes because its profitable and as long as it turns a profit we’ll continue to see a diverse array of films.

Note: All facts and figures were obtained from Box Office Mojo (www.boxofficemojo.com)

Film Review: BLOODSUCKERS (aka VAMPIRE WARS: THE BATTLE FOR THE UNIVERSE) (2005)

Just when humans are learning to get around in the universe they discover that the universe is more crowded than they could have imagined.  It is crowded with a plethora of vampires.  This is the premise behind the action/horror/sci-fi hybrid that is Bloodsuckers (aka Vampire Wars: The Battle for the Universe)(2005).  The universe is overrun with different types of vampires who ravage human settlements on planets throughout the galaxy.     It takes a special kind of soldier to hunt and kill vampires which is where the V-SAN (Vampire Sanitation) come in.  They go wherever the vampires are spotted and eradicate them. 

On their latest mission, the V-SAN realize that something is different about the vampire attacks and fear that the different vampire races may be working together as well as with a rogue group of human vampire activists with a nefarious goal that may threaten humanity all across the galaxy.  Now the V-SAN group must learn the truth and stop their greatest threat before it is too late.

This film doesn’t pretend to be anything other than what it is – an outer space action film that happens to have vampires.  It’s a fun romp through sci-fi chaos and war and is entertaining from beginning to end.  Being the type of film that it is it can’t help but be a little campy and the addition of Michael Ironside in the cast just confirms it.  This film may not be the most intelligent vampire action film out there but it sure is one of the most entertaining and if you miss that then you’re missing the whole point of the film.

Film Review: THE HOUSE THAT WOULD NOT DIE (1970)

The spirits of the dead cannot rest in the made for TV movie The House That Would Not Die (1970) in which Barbara Stanwyck stars as Ruth Bennett who has just inherited a house from a recently passed aunt.  Ruth moves into the house with her niece Sarah (Kitty Winn).  During a house warming party a séance goes wrong and Sarah is suddenly possessed by a mysterious woman with a connection to the house.  As Ruth tries to understand what is going on, Sarah’s mental health declines and a revelation to the house’s original owner is revealed when she comes across a hidden Bible within the house’s walls.  With the help of her neighbor Pat (Richard Egan) and Sarah’s boyfriend, Ruth must discover the truth of the possession before she loses Sarah to an unspeakable evil. 

 

Based on the novel by Barbara Michaels, the screenplay by Henry Farrell does a good job of presenting the material.  Although dated by today’s standards, as a ‘70s film it played to the sensibilities of the time as it explored the séance as a “party favor” and touched upon its ramifications and fears of the time.  There is a very logical explanation to the possession (unlike many such films of today) and it’s even laid out as a mystery to be solved.

Although John Llewellyn Mosey’s direction is flat it works for the film as it doesn’t allow for style to get in the way which many theatrical possession films of today do.  For a TV movie you can do worse than this and although it won’t leave a lasting impression it is a film that shows the ‘70s possession film for what it was.

Film Review: THE CASE OF THE WHITECHAPEL VAMPIRE (2002)

The Sir Arthur Conan Doyle character of Sherlock Holmes being in the public domain has allowed a wide range of film makers craft their own stories of the iconic character and to say any one version is a more realized version misses the point of having multiple different versions out there to choose from (there are three currently on the air on television and in film alone).  The Case of the Whitechapel Vampire (2002) features character actor Matt Frewer with the honor of putting on the iconic Holmes’s hat in a case that may involve the existence of the supernatural in the form of vampires. 

Holmes and his most trusted companion Dr. Watson (Kenneth Welsh) are called in to investigate the murder of a monk and by the two puncture marks on the neck it is believed that a vampire is responsible.  With more murders piling up fast Holmes and Watson must discover who the murderer is and for what reason before Holmes finds himself being framed as the culprit.

It’s hard to imagine Frewer as Holmes probably because he’s so miscast even for this made for TV film.  He displays none of the charisma of say Peter Cushing, Ronald Howard, Michael Caine, or Robert Downy, Jr. coming off very flat especially against Welsh as Watson, who is more interesting.  Luckily Welsh makes up for Frewer’s shortcomings and it doesn’t distract from the film too much.   In regular Holmes fashion there has to be a logical explanation for the vampire-style killings and he must find out what that is.

I will say that writer/director Rodney Gibbons does give the film a traditional Sherlock Holmes mystery look and feel which is unexpected considering that it is a TV movie.  It does look better than expected and is quite an entertaining mystery.  This is not something I can say for all other Holmes adaptations out there.  This being said this Holmes mystery is an easily digestible treat that won’t leave an aftertaste.

Film Review: 7 NIGHTS OF DARKNESS (2011)

Six strangers are tasked with spending the next seven nights in a supposedly haunted abandoned asylum with a nefarious history.  This is the premise behind 7 Nights of Darkness (2011).    Compromised of footage the contestants are supposed to be filming each night, the film is a mixture of found footage and regular cinematic techniques as it decides when and when it doesn’t want to adhere to the “found footage” aesthetic in order to “cheat” and get a better angle. 

Each day the six contestants are given a task that they have to fulfill in order to proceed to the next day.  Each successful day brings them one step closer to winning $7 million that will be split among the people who manage to stay till the end of the week.  Despite being locked up in the asylum and given only a single task during the entire day, most of the contestants spend their time playing cards and doing relatively nothing.  All the contestants are strangers from different states with different backgrounds and they have little in common with one another.

Whereas most films of this kind would revel at the chance to explore the location and see what is going on none of these characters are really interested (except for one who is quickly the first person to meet a paranormal fate) and therefore the audience is never really interested.  The film is comprised of uninteresting characters with little to no motivation other than to get rich.  There is no real drive in the characters or the film and even when “spooky” stuff starts to happen the film decides to fall into the tired old trope of having stupid characters do stupid things.

Written & directed by Allen Kellogg the plot is lazy and the direction is uninspired and uninteresting.  There is nothing in the film that hasn’t been done a thousand times before in other mediocre and poor found footage paranormal films.