This guy's presence in anything seems to ensure its mediocrity.
The minute I see his name in a project, nowadays, my immediate inclination is to say "huh, guess i'll wait for that to be on satellite"..
"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
You do realize that reynolds is by far the best thing in his movies and if you put someone else in his movies, those would be equally good or bad?
Your logic fails on sooo many levels.
The Voices was pretty good
I call movies that are considered bad hated movies.
The OP is dead on.
It isn't that RR is a bad actor, lazy, or difficult on set... It is just that he doesn't radiate the expected testosterone that you want to see flowing out of a lead protagonist.
He seems a little soft, and that projects into the minds of male youth.
Maybe he should just stick with chick flics and comedy's.
For me, a male lead protagonist does not need to be oozing testosterone. Not only would that expectation be closed-minded, but it's also very unrealistic. There is no blueprint for a stereotypical male protagonist, at least not in my mind...
shareuh, tom hanks blew that stereotype out the water from back in the 80s.... a male lead doesn't have to be rambo, it can be the everyday kinda guy-next-door- type of dude...
It's mercy, compassion and forgiveness I lack. Not rationality...
He needs a new agent. He's not an A lister no matter how much people think. He needs to do better projects as 2nd or 3rd lead for a while. Like Vince did in "smoke jumpers"
shareI think he has an amazing agent! He has repeatedly shown that, while he may turn in an excellent performance, he does not put butts in seats.
The number of outright bombs he has produced should have killed his career. And yet he keeps getting splashy lead roles.
Personally, I'm a fan. Especially of THE VOICES. But he's not a true marquee name.
What were his bombs? He's also been apart or helped hits as well
shareBlade trinity was supposed to launch a spinoff franchise for Reynolds and Biel. People HATED them and it killed the franchise.
TURBO - resulted in major stock price decline for Dreamworks Animation.
RIPD - released the same day as Turbo(!) cost almost 200 million and opened to under 20. Well under. Lost 9-figures for the studio. Stillborn franchise.
GREEN LANTERN - lost $100 million, killed the franchise before it was born, and caused DC to recalibrate its entire approach to films. Dead comic book franchise number 3. (It'll be 4 after deadpool bombs.)
Adventureland -- big, big commercial spend because of a hot cast, total failure to deliver box office.
Self/Less -- not a bomb, because it was presold for foreign distribution, but still a big embarrassment.
Look, I like Reynolds a lot. Voices is the best movie of the year, by far. I'll probably like Deadpool next February. But, he has way more misses than hits. And they are great big 200 million dollar misses on several occasions.
GREEN LANTERN -
Blade was already terrible and who cares about some comic book green hornet crap? All of those comic book movies are a joke in my opinion. Good for guilty pleasures and child audiences, nothing more...
shareBlade was terrible? Blade Trinity was horrible. The fist two were good. Who cares about comic book movies? Do u live in a cave? Superhero movies are the hottest thing in Hollywood. Look at the box office, look at the HYPE around them. Its okay to think that comic books are joke, but u have to be pretty ignorant to NOT see the money that is in those movies.
shareI'm sorry, but box office revenue is not part of my criteria for a "good film", however, different strokes for different folks.
share"All of those comic book movies are a joke in my opinion. Good for guilty pleasures and child audiences, nothing more..."
The box office numbers shows you how many people care about comic book movies. I never said box office=good movie.
You're drunk. Stay off of the Internet.
shareHe's entirely sane and you sound like the irate one. The discussion was not "Which good movies has Ryan Reynolds made?" It was, "Does he make any money for studios?" And bar early supporting roles or the occasional fluke, most of his lead roles -- and all of the really big ones that the other poster mentioned -- have flopped. I think he can be a good actor (I really liked him in Mississippi Grind and The Voices), but he got packaged overnight as the Next Big Thing and the audience wasn't there to back it up.
After ten years or so, I've finally changed my signature!
1. Blade was awesome.
2. Please do not mix up Green Hornet (a great movie) with Green Lantern (an awful movie).
3. The joke here is that you are unable to comprehend different genres and thus proclaim them to be for children, when the child here is you.
---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.
Adventureland was made for 9.8 million and made 17 million so not sure what you are talking about.
shareYeah. The movie came out on 1,862 screens and grossed just $5.72 million opening weekend. There is basically no scenario where a wide release film (though this wasn't super-wide) grosses under 6 million opening weekend and the studio is happy.
Miramax spent at least $15-20 million marketing this movie. So that $10 million budget is actually $25-30 million. 17 million gross, minus the theaters' cut and physical distribution costs is about $8-10 million.
But even in this scenario, the studio *could* have made money on the film in one of two ways.
A) They presold the foreign rights based upon the collective name value of the high profile cast. This is what happened with Reynolds' SELF/LESS. Focus presold the foreign rights at Cannes and covered the entire production budget before they started filming. Focus Features' only exposure was on domestic P&A. But, they had to release the film wide in order to fulfill their contractual obligation to the foreign distributor. (Films released wide in the US have a higher market value on the international market than those that are not.) As a result, Focus quietly released SELF/LESS in early july with a total P&A spend of well-under $10 million. The movie absolutely died, but all in... the studio will be made whole. The foreign distributors however, well, they're left holding the bag.
B) Great DVD sales.
Adventureland clearly doesn't fit into Category A. There is no way that foreign distributors ponied up 10 million in presales and then just... didn't release the movie. Adventureland never even saw theatrical release in most of the world. This isn't uncommon for comedies, especially heavily-localized period dramedies.
Adventureland also clearly doesn't fit into Category B. The DVD market was already dead as a doornail by 2009. The studio *might* have broken even once you account for cable sales, netflix streaming rights, network sales and the remaining DVD numbers, but no one was happy. You don't make a movie with this cast and this director and hope to break even.
---
TL;DR -- Making 16 million domestic on a 10 million dollar wide release film is an absolute disaster.
,Said the Shotgun to the Head--
Saul Williams
showing your prejudice there, why anticipate deadpool to bomb? i suspect it's going to do very well, considering it is, i think, the only comic book movie with an R rating, and that alone keeps it very much within the character's reality, cause deadpool is a bit of a potty mouth....
It's mercy, compassion and forgiveness I lack. Not rationality...
The only one that was mainly his fault or to blame was Green Lantern. Since he was the clear lead and there was a lot of hype and promotion (coming from the studios and him). RIPD flopped but he was 2nd billed to Jeff Bridges. I don't get why Bridges doesn't get the blame. Turbo was an animated film, hardly his fault. And he wasn't a lead or co-lead in Adventureland.
shareEven if I were to accept your premise that RIPD, Turbo, and Adventureland don't count against Reynold's star status, being front and center in a $200 million bomb that loses the studio over $100 million and forces executives to recalibrate their entire "shared universe" of movies (thus exponentially expanding the losses due to opportunity cost and lost time before the relaunch) should be enough to kill a star's career.
shareRIPD cost 160 million.
Green Lantern cost 200 million.
Turbo cost 160 million (and opened again Green Lantern.)
Blade Trinity ended that franchise and failed to launch a spinoff.
And that's just the comic book related bombs...
The only thing I really ever loved him in was "Waiting".
-----
Here's my latest film: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5531336/
Reynolds starred in one of the cult comedies of the 2000's (Van Wilder). Check.
Reynolds can be pretty intense (Buried, Smokin Aces). Check.
He's a pretty good character ACTOR with movie star looks.
No big huge star would have touched Buried, Fireflies or Mississippi Grind: he did and I love what he did with those roles.
---
'Don't just DO something, STAND there!'
Pastor Charlie Bing