“Another problem: no A-list actors.”
No doubt stars make a box office difference. I suspect their cost-benefit ratio is off and that they are generally overpaid, but I don’t know enough about the industry to say for sure.
One thing I do know is that great movies don’t need them. If you look at the top grossers of all time, they conspicuously lack stars. That is, with the exception of Clark Gable in “Gone With the Wind.” “Star Wars”? Alec Guniess in a supporting role, then no one. “E.T.,” no one. “Titanic,” before Leo was big. “The Ten Commandments,” before Heston made it. “Jaws,” character-actors Robert Shaw and Roy Scheider, then no one. “Dr. Zhivago,” no one. “Avatar,” Sigourney Weaver in a small role, and no one else.
I could go on. Of course, these are the biggest movies of all time, and are therefore outliers. If you want to win a random weekend box office, you go with a name. All I’m saying is that ultimately the quality of the movie is what’s important.
A lot of the films you mentioned had A-list directors (even if no A-list actors in prominent roles), big budgets, or ground breaking special effects (like Star Wars).
The AS Part I clip looked okay, but nothing spectacular. In fact, some of the footage (like the trains) looked like stock footage. And I don’t have to tell you that the MSM movie reviewers will be negative.
Of course, AS has a LOT of fans, many of whom have been waiting a long time for the movie (like me) That by itself will enable it to do okay at the theaters. But I think the DVD sales will make this film very successful.