As the new week began, Gravity faced the test of weekday performance. Although the film's first-week box office was outstanding, achieving a strong final box office result in North America required a sufficiently stable trend. Moreover, a stable box office performance was closely related to word-of-mouth, which also benefited the film's award campaign.
Facts proved that the film's strong early reputation among audiences and media, coupled with the "diamond brand" Duke had built over more than a dozen films, directly translated into commercial appeal.
On Monday, the first weekday after the wide release of Gravity, the film's daily box office dropped only 42% from Sunday, ending the day with $14.95 million.
Tuesday, traditionally a discount day for theaters in North America, often sees the highest weekday box office for many films. Gravity was no exception, grossing $15.87 million that day.
However, by Wednesday, the film's box office inevitably dropped by 20%, earning $12.97 million.
With Thursday's earnings of $13.05 million included, Gravity grossed $145.9 million in North America during the first week after expanding its release.
From the second weekend onward, the film would begin a wide release in overseas markets.
Gravity was in full swing at the box office, and the Oscar nomination voting that began on December 31 last year was also in full swing. Ballots mailed by the Academy to members wouldn't be fully returned until early February, giving voters ample time to deliberate. This also served as the best window for studios to lobby on behalf of their films.
If a voter selected a particular film or actor during the nominations, and they made it into the final list, the likelihood of the voter making the same choice during final voting often exceeded 90%.
Moreover, once the nomination list was announced, many lobbying efforts could no longer be carried out as openly, especially actions aimed at discrediting competitors.
Every award season sees films attacking each other, especially popular ones that often become primary targets. For example, Ang Lee's Brokeback Mountain lost the Best Picture award it had a strong chance at, largely due to endless smears from television media and industry insiders.
This industry has always been entangled in fame and fortune. This year would be no different. The currently screening and well-received Gravity inevitably became the target of certain attacks.
"Gravity: A shallow, flaw-riddled, tech-driven piece of work!"
The title of an article in the latest issue of The Hollywood Reporter stood out. Purchasing advertisements or columns in a highly influential industry publication like The Hollywood Reporter was not something only Duke did many in Hollywood who could afford it did the same.
"Since Gravity's release, many have hailed it as a masterpiece. The reasons cited for calling it that usually include good technology, good story, good acting, strong immersion, depth of thought, and artistic value."
"To be fair, praising the film for its technical quality is still within a reasonable range. Although the visual effects presented aren't as stunning as Avatar, they at least show some production investment for this year. But to claim its 3D effects rival Avatar that's beyond comprehension."
"Avatar's visual effects had even distant blades of grass rendered in extreme detail. When smoke filled the screen, you could almost feel dust on your clothes. What about Gravity? Aside from the satellite debris sequence, the rest was as flat as a board. When I watched it, most people in the theater said the 3D effects were lacking. I have no idea how people who praise the 3D effects see 'breathtaking' or 'immersive' visuals."
"A good story, you say? Honestly, citing that is as effortless as it is lazy. What defines a story? A sequence of events. What defines a good story? One where the events are dramatic, tense, coherent, vivid, complete, and convey some deeper meaning or moral."
"What story does Gravity tell? A survival story. The core is survival overcoming various obstacles to live. Most of the film shows the heroine drifting around, almost grabbing something, failing, drifting again, and this time grabbing it. Then again, not working—try something else, drift again, nearly miss it, then succeed. Is that what you call a good story?"
"And since it's a solo female lead, there's no real suspense regarding her fate. Of course, you might ask, 'How do you know she won't die?' I'll just say normal human logic doesn't work that way. Surprise twists are okay occasionally, but survival films are about the escape process. Some might watch an hour of flat space footage after the heroine dies, but a rigid director like Duke Rosenberg clearly wouldn't take that risk."
"The narrative is as bland as a toddler learning to walk falling down, standing up, falling again, and finally learning to walk. If that kid runs a few steps in the end, then that story easily outshines Gravity. Those who think this film has a good story probably tearfully thank God every morning just for being alive."
"Good acting? Let's not even get into how a story-light, dialogue-poor film limits any chance for acting brilliance. From what we saw, Scarlett Johansson was acting just to act empty expressions, exaggerated performance. When facing danger, there was no genuine fear. When losing a colleague, no sorrow or grief. When hope was crushed, no despair. When barking like a dog at the end, no loneliness."
"Scarlett Johansson's performance was absolutely disastrous big-eyed but soulless, entirely lacking personality. All she did was scream, gasp, and burn through oxygen like her life depended on it. Sometimes, it was hard to tell whether she wanted to live or die. Don't excuse it as trauma-induced numbness. I guarantee Alessandra Ambrosio would've acted better."
"Immersion? Because of the flat visuals and lack of emotional buildup, audiences neither felt the grandeur of space nor the helplessness of weightlessness. The thin plot and boring narrative made it impossible to get into the film."
"As for so-called depth or artistic value, I won't even bother arguing with you. You're already beyond saving. Since when did Duke Rosenberg's films have anything to do with either of those things?"
"While film appreciation can vary based on personal interpretation, movies still follow certain creative norms and standards. A good film must withstand the test of intellect and time. Commercial fare like Gravity cannot be elevated into masterpiece status simply through hollow praise or brainless fan overanalysis."
The media can influence many people's choices especially voters who rarely watch films. The Hollywood Reporter's industry clout is unquestionable.
On the other hand, in the history of the Oscars, aside from the exceptional Lord of the Rings trilogy, no non-realist film has ever achieved sweeping success. Many people have therefore focused on the realism of Gravity.
A former astronaut named Scott Parazynski accepted an exclusive interview with the media. He has completed seven spacewalks, including spending seven hours dangling on the robotic arm of the International Space Station, repairing a solar panel array that could potentially electrocute him at any moment.
In the interview, he pointed out a variety of common-sense errors in the film.
"The first thing that shocked me was that during the spacewalk with three people, only one person was doing any real work. Poor Scarlett Johansson was doing all the tasks, while the other two men were doing nothing: one was fiddling with the payload bay of the space shuttle, and George Clooney was wearing a turbo-charged jetpack. In the movie, you see him using the jetpack to approach the Hubble Space Telescope. If you do that in real life, you'd crash into the solar panel array, bend it, and render it useless. So all of that is wrong—even laughable."
"Let me also talk about the plausibility of Scarlett Johansson's character. She's supposed to be inexperienced she said she had undergone six months of training and that this was her first mission. During ground training, she couldn't even land the flight simulator properly. With that level of training and experience, it would be impossible for her to be assigned a mission. She calls herself a mission specialist, but what she really is, is what we call a 'payload specialist': someone with a very specific skill might be sent on a space mission to perform a particular task or experiment. What I'm saying is, to become an expert in spacewalking, you need at least two years of basic skills training. We never send a payload specialist to do a spacewalk."
"There's another seriously inaccurate scene: Scarlett Johansson not wearing a liquid-cooling garment or a diaper is a major mistake for a spacewalk sequence."
Finally, the former astronaut concluded with deliberate humor: "But hey, this is a science fiction movie not based on reality, so we shouldn't look at it through a professional lens."
As soon as this exclusive interview aired on TV, Duke saw the related content. The other party's intent was quite clear to eliminate any potential realism in Gravity, so that most people would naturally categorize it alongside other sci-fi films like Star Wars.
As everyone knows, that type of film has never been the Oscars' favorite.
.....
Hi For access to additional chapters of
Director in Hollywood (40 chpaters)
Made In Hollywood (60 Chapters)
Pokemon:Bounty Hunter(30 Chapters)
Douluo Dalu: Reincarnated as Yan(40 Chapters)
Hollywood:From Razzie to Legend(40 Chapters)
The Great Ruler (30 Chapters)
Join pateron.com/Translaterappu