This is a movie about the first black US Navy aviator during the Korean War. The big news right now in Hollywood is that this completely flopped financially at the box office. Do we have any theories as to why so few people were interested in seeing this?
1. Subject matter? I guess no one really cares about seeing a Korean War movie?
2. Poorly marketed? It seems this movie really wasn't marketed very much either online or on TV. Maybe the studio execs already knew this was going to flop so why pour more money into it?
3. Post-Covid effect? Maybe a lot more people will see this movie but not until they can stream it at home?
Either way, I just think it's pretty sad that this movie flopped so badly because it will just discourage studios even more from making films like these in the future.
Devotion
Moderator: RLG MGMT Team
-
PanzerMeyer
- Posts: 4795
- Joined: 10 Feb 2004, 08:54
- Location: Miami, Florida
Devotion
I have learned from experience that a modicum of snuff can be most efficacious - Baron Munchausen
Re: Devotion
This same phenomenon is why there will most likely not be another "West Side Story" or musical movie for that matter. The remake had Speilberg's name on it and got rave reviews, but flopped at the box office. There was the pandemic affecting it, true, but there was also lack of interest. No one really cares to see a musical anymore. So though the movie got great reviews, a high number of Oscar nominations, and its share of Oscar wins--the studio still can't forget that it lost money on it, and will most likely not make another "bad investment."
I think "Devotion" probably fell into the same issue. Korea has long been called "America's Forgotten War" and is probably true today. Most people could care less that there is a movie that takes place during the main part of the Korean War. I, on the other hand like that and me and my friend Viper whom you flew with a few times before are still planning to see it in the theatre. But to be honest, while we wait for our schedules to synch up so that we can, I'm finding it harder and harder to find a theatre still playing this movie.
Another factor is that given today's societal feelings and attitudes, no one really cares for war or aggrandizing it, maybe even more than before. There's a war in Ukraine going on, and until recently in Afghanistan and Iraq. No one wants it anymore, and thus their interest in war movies are next to nil. Now one can say, well, there are all these action movies that make tons of money all the time, why doesn't this one? Well, those action movies are just that--action movies. They are over the top movies with characters that are so impervious to any real consequence that hey, if thousands die in it there is really no consequence and no guilty conscience or bad memory to have to dig up and relive. The violence sells, but only the senseless kind.
What about "Top Gun: Maverick" which has done so well that it was re-released for the 2nd time this weekend for a 2 week run? Well, "Top Gun: Maverick" was fueled primarily by its ties to the original, and the current trend of throwbacks in media. We have reboots, we have 80s music parties, we have old toys being reissued as new. "Top Gun" was so iconic that its sequel appealed to those how saw the original, and if they liked the original they wanted to see if the sequel would live up to it, or just what would happen to Maverick. Those who saw the original and didn't like it saw the sequel anyway because it was a throwback to their earlier life and the nostalgia was there. They were probably even quoting lines from the original, or at least were recognizing them, because it was so iconic and ingrained in our pop culture.
The newer generations wanted to see it because they were curious or had heard of the phenomenon that was the original "Top Gun" or they saw it on VHS/Cable/Disc with their parents and so there was a different degree of nostalgia involved there. But also, they could have also heard from those who saw it that it was good, and so they saw it and agreed, and word got around. Not to mention the flying scenes which had never been done before to this extent, was enough appeal for them or anyone to go see it. Add to that factor that it could be seen in IMAX, 4DX, and so on. Paramount even came out and said that even though "Top Gun: Maverick" has been out on digital and disc for quite a while now, they were bringing it back in the theatre to allow people to see it on the big screen, where it was meant to be seen and since the movie was filmed with making it the best experience on the big screen to begin with.
Then of course there are other factors such as marketing. There really weren't any commercials about "Devotion" and usually movies that are released in the November-February time frame are known ahead of time to be low-draw (the exception being the newer Star Wars sequels and the latest Black Panther outing), so I think the studio anticipated that. It looks through what advertising they did have that they couldn't decide whether to actively pursue the "celebration of race" card. The previews didn't show much about the whole concept being about an African American Navy pilot who had to struggle past racial barriers to fly very important missions in Korea. It was as if the producers didn't want to capitalize on the current trend of celebrating people of color or they were uneasy as to how their portrayal of that would be taken in today's sensitive atmosphere. This, during the same release time as "Black Panther: Wakanda Forever" which clearly celebrates this diversity since its predecessor. Perhaps the "Devotion" studio doesn't want to rain on Black Panther's parade or compete with it. If you know the story of "Devotion" you will not what I'm referring to, but I'm also probably overthinking it. As for COVID, I would say that is a factor if the movie was to be released earlier this year or late last, but I feel as if the concern over COVID these days is not as high as before and would not deter people in general from risking catching it in a theatrical setting. I think the last thing is that although we would love to see a movie like this as aviation enthusiasts, we represent a very small percentage of the population that are aviation or otherwise history buffs. Heck, in terms of the Korean War, I still like watching "The Bridges Over Toko-Ri" (not because of Grace Kelly, Creeper, sorry!) even though it was depressing. It's history. Well, Hollywood's version of it.
So, those are my theories. I still want to see this movie. I mean, just the scene alone where a MiG-15 shows up and the Corsair pilots are yelling, "That's a MiG! That's a MiG!" had my heart racing. Imagine never seeing a fighter without a propeller before, let alone having to fight it for the first time.
v6,
boNes
I think "Devotion" probably fell into the same issue. Korea has long been called "America's Forgotten War" and is probably true today. Most people could care less that there is a movie that takes place during the main part of the Korean War. I, on the other hand like that and me and my friend Viper whom you flew with a few times before are still planning to see it in the theatre. But to be honest, while we wait for our schedules to synch up so that we can, I'm finding it harder and harder to find a theatre still playing this movie.
Another factor is that given today's societal feelings and attitudes, no one really cares for war or aggrandizing it, maybe even more than before. There's a war in Ukraine going on, and until recently in Afghanistan and Iraq. No one wants it anymore, and thus their interest in war movies are next to nil. Now one can say, well, there are all these action movies that make tons of money all the time, why doesn't this one? Well, those action movies are just that--action movies. They are over the top movies with characters that are so impervious to any real consequence that hey, if thousands die in it there is really no consequence and no guilty conscience or bad memory to have to dig up and relive. The violence sells, but only the senseless kind.
What about "Top Gun: Maverick" which has done so well that it was re-released for the 2nd time this weekend for a 2 week run? Well, "Top Gun: Maverick" was fueled primarily by its ties to the original, and the current trend of throwbacks in media. We have reboots, we have 80s music parties, we have old toys being reissued as new. "Top Gun" was so iconic that its sequel appealed to those how saw the original, and if they liked the original they wanted to see if the sequel would live up to it, or just what would happen to Maverick. Those who saw the original and didn't like it saw the sequel anyway because it was a throwback to their earlier life and the nostalgia was there. They were probably even quoting lines from the original, or at least were recognizing them, because it was so iconic and ingrained in our pop culture.
The newer generations wanted to see it because they were curious or had heard of the phenomenon that was the original "Top Gun" or they saw it on VHS/Cable/Disc with their parents and so there was a different degree of nostalgia involved there. But also, they could have also heard from those who saw it that it was good, and so they saw it and agreed, and word got around. Not to mention the flying scenes which had never been done before to this extent, was enough appeal for them or anyone to go see it. Add to that factor that it could be seen in IMAX, 4DX, and so on. Paramount even came out and said that even though "Top Gun: Maverick" has been out on digital and disc for quite a while now, they were bringing it back in the theatre to allow people to see it on the big screen, where it was meant to be seen and since the movie was filmed with making it the best experience on the big screen to begin with.
Then of course there are other factors such as marketing. There really weren't any commercials about "Devotion" and usually movies that are released in the November-February time frame are known ahead of time to be low-draw (the exception being the newer Star Wars sequels and the latest Black Panther outing), so I think the studio anticipated that. It looks through what advertising they did have that they couldn't decide whether to actively pursue the "celebration of race" card. The previews didn't show much about the whole concept being about an African American Navy pilot who had to struggle past racial barriers to fly very important missions in Korea. It was as if the producers didn't want to capitalize on the current trend of celebrating people of color or they were uneasy as to how their portrayal of that would be taken in today's sensitive atmosphere. This, during the same release time as "Black Panther: Wakanda Forever" which clearly celebrates this diversity since its predecessor. Perhaps the "Devotion" studio doesn't want to rain on Black Panther's parade or compete with it. If you know the story of "Devotion" you will not what I'm referring to, but I'm also probably overthinking it. As for COVID, I would say that is a factor if the movie was to be released earlier this year or late last, but I feel as if the concern over COVID these days is not as high as before and would not deter people in general from risking catching it in a theatrical setting. I think the last thing is that although we would love to see a movie like this as aviation enthusiasts, we represent a very small percentage of the population that are aviation or otherwise history buffs. Heck, in terms of the Korean War, I still like watching "The Bridges Over Toko-Ri" (not because of Grace Kelly, Creeper, sorry!) even though it was depressing. It's history. Well, Hollywood's version of it.
So, those are my theories. I still want to see this movie. I mean, just the scene alone where a MiG-15 shows up and the Corsair pilots are yelling, "That's a MiG! That's a MiG!" had my heart racing. Imagine never seeing a fighter without a propeller before, let alone having to fight it for the first time.
v6,
boNes
"Also, I would prefer a back seater over the extra gas any day. I would have 80 pounds of flesh to eat and a pair of glasses to start a fire." --F/A-18 Hornet pilot
-
PanzerMeyer
- Posts: 4795
- Joined: 10 Feb 2004, 08:54
- Location: Miami, Florida
Re: Devotion
Great post bones and I agree with all your major points. You are absolutely right that Top Gun: Maverick became a blockbuster due to the fantastic word of mouth and also playing on the nostalgia of people who saw the original movie.
I have learned from experience that a modicum of snuff can be most efficacious - Baron Munchausen
Re: Devotion
And also, well, it IS a good movie!PanzerMeyer wrote: ↑05 Dec 2022, 07:50Great post bones and I agree with all your major points. You are absolutely right that Top Gun: Maverick became a blockbuster due to the fantastic word of mouth and also playing on the nostalgia of people who saw the original movie.
v6,
boNes
"Also, I would prefer a back seater over the extra gas any day. I would have 80 pounds of flesh to eat and a pair of glasses to start a fire." --F/A-18 Hornet pilot