https://twitter.com/ERCboxoffice/status/1439611894629765122
Literally...just a fistful of dollars.share
Clint Eastwood's latest, CRY MACHO, was heavy on the cry, light on the macho, as it rode off with just $4.5M in its debut in 3,967 venues--just $1,138 per.
That's too bad. It's a well made, enjoyable film. I think the fact that it is on HBO Max hurt its box office somewhat and there isn't a large audience for intelligent, adult dramas (especially when the lead actor is a 91 year old man).
shareJesus Christ - you keep thinking that people are giving it bad reviews because they don't like old people.
We are judging film on its own merits - not on who made it and what condition he was in.
I like Clint - I don't care about his age - if he picks a script where he plays an elderly - he can still make an awesome movie.
Picking a script written for a much younger man, while not making an effort (potentially being unable to make an effort at this stage), was not a good move. Suspension of disbelief is gone very quickly in this film. Worse yet, there are several other actors in this film who do a piss-poor job, and that's entirely Clint's fault - him being the producer and director of this film.
what you said. yes. all of it. exactly.
I wanted to watch it and like it, but it just didn't work for me.
The Mule made over a 100 million. So adult dramas can bring people in, but the film has to hit a nerve.
shareSeptember hasn’t always been a big month at the movies.
shareThat's a shame, but apparently Malignant and Reminscence--which also got dual theatrical/HBO Max releases--also did very poorly so I'm not sure how much Warner was expecting to make.
Hopefully it was a driver for some Max subscriptions.
Mistake was releasing it simultaneously on HBOMax, which almost every fan of movies has. I would have watched it in a theater if I couldn't watch it for free at home. Not Eastwood's best work, but a decent film
As with so many other "COVID year releases," with this dual HBO Max release, we will never know exactly how a small film like Cry Macho would have done if limited to theatrical release first.
Something like Kong vs Godzilla was big enough to still rack up $100 million in theaters, but Cry Macho likely would have always been a low performing title.
On the other hand...it was clearly "made cheap" and wouldn't have needed to make much money to turn a profit and...it gets added to "the Clint Eastwood canon" as, the one film he has made over age 90. Which makes it historic. Until he makes another one.
The movie is a real nothing movie. It is Clint moving around in front of the camera ... exactly what brainless fans say they'd be entranced by. It's like the endless concerts by old geriatric groups trying to pretend they can recreate the performances that made them great, only they look and sound like crap.
shareYou sound like the type who worshipped Steve Jobs and hated Boomers without knowing that Steve Jobs was a Boomer.
share