The summer box office is a very complex orchestra of films. Filled with independent dramas, giant cast comedies, and huge blockbuster franchises all vying for a spot at the top to profit big on their investments. Sadly for "Valerian," that did not happen over the weekend even though they spent over 180 million to create it. Here is why it flopped and how you can learn from it as a creative.
You might wonder how you might learn as a creative from a big budget French-based comic film, but humor me for just a moment as I explain the value here. First published in Pilote magazine in 1967 by French artists Pierre Christin and Jean-Claude Mézières and running all the way up until 2010, "Valerian" has a strong following in Europe but not so much in the United States where much of the total world profits build. Outside of France, this film is near a complete unknown to the rest of the globe and that is partially why it failed.
Overall timing in the movie industry does come into play far more than you might think and I see this as the perfect example of a decent film with a fun and brilliant art-filled vision failing miserably. Sure this movie still has a chance to grow further with its already cult following over seas and I truly hope it does. In the end you have to see where to learn from these experiences. They were up against Christopher Nolan's powerful "Dunkirk" and the week old "Spider-Man: Homecoming" for crying out loud. Sorry but that is just poor timing and the luck of the draw.
How can you learn from this as a creative? Knowing your strengths can go a long way and realizing how timing plays into each and every post to social or even how you use simple tags and release dates are also important. For example, when I first did a review video for The Polaroid Snap Touch on YouTube I knew when the release date was and I knew relevancy was low on YouTube for quality review videos. Did I realize adding a few topical tags, keeping it sub 5 minutes, and sharing it to a handful of various people on Twitter and Instagram it would reach over 20,000 views? Not a chance, but I saw an opportunity and a space to place that video and went with it.
In the end my point is that even though you can spend countless hours on a project with a solid following and nearly unlimited funds it could simply come down to timing and how important it is you get that work in front of the right audience to find it impactful and not allow it to be lost in the mix. With the crowded space of the interwebs today it can be incredibly difficult, but its possible, and knowing when and where to post what pieces of content is a simple takeaway.
While I agree with the whole timing aspect of releases and promotions, I think with Valerian (and any film really), in the end it all comes down to story.
I just saw the film last night and through the entire film, I was never given a real reason to like Valerian while on the other hand, his partner Laureline was a much more interesting and likable character.
There were several other factors that made it a "less than great" film, but I think another great lesson that creatives can learn from Valerian is that story is always king, no matter how visually captivating your footage or visual effects are. We all know this already. You have to give your audience a reason to be emotionally invested in the main character and their story. If not, the entire journey is of little interest.
Very very true. I didn't really hit too hard on story because the actual story behind Valerian is pretty good and interesting in the comic world but it didnt seem to translate to film. That might be from casting too. Dan DeHaan is a great actor but def has his look and feel set in stone and its hard to see him in the intense action adventure role just yet.
This comment should be sent to every major studio. At the end of the day all that really matters is how well written the movie is. A classic will be a favorite forever. Even as visual trends change or improve, a classic story will last the test of time and thats something that I feel like so many movies lack these days.
While I haven't seen the movie, part of that could be poor marketing. Timing is one thing but I really haven't heard much about it. In a time where Netflix and HBO are killing it with films and tv shows, the movie industry needs to start taking things seriously.
I feel like part of it was the trailers were kind of weak. I didn't come away from the trailers thinking wow I want to go see this, I came away thinking this looks lame... can't put a finger on exactly whey though
I took my whole family to see this, and they all loved it. Shame on the timing as I'd like to see more movies come from it. Although I'd prefer if Dan DeHaan stopped doing a Keanu Reeves impression during it. ;)
Agree. I love popcorn flicks with solid story and great action here and there and especially in the summer time but this one just didnt quite strike me as hard as some others. For example, Maze Runner and that whole series. Those are fun as hell even though they haven't been smash hits they get just enough money to fund a sequel and full series without much effort. Story is intresting and the thriller aspect is stronger.
Actually, Valarian was saved by its timing. It debuted during Comic-Con weekend while most of the heavy-hitting YouTube critics were otherwise occupied. If they had been available to watch it, the results would be worse than it was.
Frankly, my wife and I were on the verge of walking out. I loved "The Fifth Element" from the start, but this was no "Fifth Element."
Casting failed, acting failed, dialog failed, story failed, pacing failed, and ultimately the director failed for not catching any of that.
The fact that it was a solid comic isn't relative. Batman is a solid comic, and "Batman and Robin" still failed. "Superman Returns" failed. "Guardians of the Galaxy" was practically unknown as a comic (outside of hardcore comic fandom), yet it succeeded wildly.
Nothing that has to be said about Valarian as a comic hit is particularly relative to its success as a movie.
What that means to the rest of us is that our work must ultimately contain something of interest beyond a technical aptitude. It has to have a reason for the audience to be interested.
But otherwise its a movie you would recommend? :D
I think in IMAX 3D with earplugs.
I wouldn't put so much blame on the director. A lot of potentially great movies were killed by producers taking way too much control away. I don't know anything about how this movie was handled but sometimes a directors hands are tied because they're getting paid by the producers.
In this particular case, it appears that it's all on the director. He even arranged most of the financing.
I saw it last night and even though I enjoyed it I kinda knew it would flop pretty hard just like most other high budget science fiction "unknowns" other than avatar, of recent years. Audiences are super hesitant to go watch blockbuster franchises they aren't familiar with unless that franchise is getting rave reviews. They especially are reluctant to go see ones with a relative no-name cast. Add in the fact that both cast leads are really only associated with other poor films doesn't help either when moviegoers google their names.
The film was certainly fun, and a breath of unique fresh air, it had its weaknesses, no doubt but it is certainly better than its box office numbers suggest. Personally, I find it disheartening when big budget film execs take a risk on a unique and new story only to have audiences rewards them with a giant flop while they all flock to the latest re-hashing of yet another super hero origin story. This sort of consumer behavior really only further convinces executives to focus on the giant rebook hamster wheel rather than trying to bring original content to the big screen.
Personally, I'd rather go see more films like Valerian that take risks than a swarm of more super hero movies that are the same thing over and over with different gimmicks.
The other big weakness of Valerian, which I felt originally watching the trailer is that the stars look too alike. Back when I watched that first trailer I thought they were brother and sister, which, for me, really made the constant hitting on her really strange.
On a side note, the endless awkward, non-receptive, cheesy, come-ons that eventually turns into true love at the end trope is long past its time. (And sorry fellow geeks, it almost never actually happens in real life, that sort of thing is more likely to lead to a restraining order than getting the girl of your dreams)
I had no interest in this film, not because it's an unknown property or because my attention was diverted by Dunkirk or Spider-Man, but because - IMO - it looks awful.
The trailers suffer from visual effects overload, throwing far too many moving parts into every frame. It's the same problem that plagues films like Avengers and Transformers. They are visually chaotic and, as a result, fatiguing, ugly and have no chance of becoming iconic (which requires visual clarity and simplicity).
And then there are the leading actors, who look like a couple of bratty kids. I took one look at them in the trailer and knew I didn't want to spend two hours in their company. I assumed it was some kind of young-adult fantasy, and was surprised to read reviews that explained they were two of the toughest space cops in the galaxy - roles for which they are terribly miscast.
That's what did it for me. I would imagine the trailer had a similar effect on others.
I just registered on this site purely so I could comment on this article.
And it's not a good comment. You have basically added not a single thing to this discussion. You say "timing is important" and hen fail to list anything one could possibly do to help improve their timing. That's not a 'lesson' that's an observation based on a single movie with no backup, no solution and no contribution to the topic at all. Seriously, do you call this an article?
Your proof is a rough outline of how you once got 20,000 hits on a YouTube video. And even then you squander that opportunity by glossing over the details of why you think it was effective - you turn it into "oh I didn't know but it was intiuitive". Great help. Thanks.
But the worst thing is you appear to have little understanding of the complexities of film marketing and distribution. Or the randomness of it. When do you think would be a good time to release Valerian? Why was going against Dunkirk bad? Surely they are at the entire opposite ends of the genre spectrum so why do they interfere?
You offered nothing here.
I signed up because I like this site but the content is getting less and less relevant. It's like information for toddlers. For years I've been skulking and reading anonymously but this vapid post was the last straw. What has happened to journalism?
As soon as I saw Rihanna doing a song and dance number, I knew it was all over. Directors who see it necessary to put a radio star on the big screen, even for a few minutes, tells me who his core audience is, the tweens who listen to that crap. So, why would I think that the movie would be any better? Well, I was proven right not to waste my time or money on this movie. Hire real actors with serious chops. Not pretty faces who do duck face when a camera is in the vecinity.
The Rihanna number was entertaining, but it brought the entire plot to a dead stop for several minutes--the lead was sitting calmly (even lecherously) watching it while knowing his lady love was about to be murdered by the worst beings in the galaxy.
I loved the look but the storyline was terrible, the dialog felt like it was written by a middle schooler and the main character gave off a bad rapey vibe.
Thanks for share.
https://mykodiaddons.com/best-kodi-build-for-firestick-android/
This cool explaination. But sometimes we wish to watch the movies like this.
https://myteatv.com/