MovieChat Forums > Wonder Boys (2000) Discussion > wonder boys - why did it bomb at the box...

wonder boys - why did it bomb at the box office?

posted 17 years ago by janusq
47 replies | jump to latest

Why did it bomb at the box office?

Have just caught up with this movie, at a writers' do. As a writer myself, I wonder if the pov was wrong. If the script writer had ignored the book, and written the film script from the pov of James Leer, rather than from the angle of a middle aged man, it might have got a bigger audience - bearing in mind that the average cinema audience is young. For myself, told of a film about the 'journey' of a middle aged man suffering from all the stock problems, or one about the 'journey' of a creative writing student who is wondering about his sexuality, and is obsessed with death - I would opt for the student's story every time. To me personally, all the great parts in this film were the black comedy parts played out around Toby McGuire - who I thought gave a stunning and under-rated performance. As did Downey, too.

Does anyone else agree? (I'm quite a bit older than James, by the way).

[–] TheAnimalMother 12 years ago

Well I saw it in the theatre so I can't be blamed.

My body's a cage, it's been used and abused...and I...LIKE IT!!

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] pablo-taylor 12 years ago

To find an audience, this kind of film needs rave reviews and award nominations, sadly by delaying it's release Wonder Boys was eclipsed by the thematically similar (but inferior IMO) American Beauty.

[–] rachaelov 12 years ago

If the script writer had ignored the book, and written the film script from the pov of James Leer, rather than from the angle of a middle aged man, it might have got a bigger audience - bearing in mind that the average cinema audience is young.

I'm just glad there is the odd film that isn't aimed at a young audience...

[–] Turfseer 10 years ago

I believe that word got around about the scene where the dog is killed. The scene is in extremely poor taste and indicative of the screenwriter's low level sense of humor. For additional reasons for my 3 out of 10 rating of this film, go to: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0185014/reviews-353).

[–] kevinhw 12 years ago

I feel that the movie bombed because it was during the era that has become the beginning of the end for Hollywood. Films like this no longer resonate to the masses. The only way large audiences see films is if they're targeted to be blockbusters. Pictures like 'Wonder Boys' will become few and far between as the industry continues to depend on explosions and fight scenes. Heavy hearts and witty dialogue are dying arts.

Earn this, earn it.

[–] Foxbarking 11 years ago

One poster said that the critics didn't love the movie and that poster is dead wrong. Not only did it get rave reviews and appear on many top ten lists, Roger Ebert named it as the best movie of the year 2000.

Many reasons are cited for it's lack of success:

It was an Oscar type production that was released in February. Generally movies like Wonder Boys do better in the fall.

The movie poster was terrible.

Very few commercials aired for the movie.

The movie left out that the title of the book Grady was working on was "Wonder Boys" and it was extremely confusing when the only mention of the title in the movie is when Grady calls James a wonder boy.

I wouldn't have even known about it if my boss at the bookstore I worked at did not recommend it to me, which I am eternally grateful since this is my favorite movie of all time.

[–] JusticeAndSoda 11 years ago

That may have made it more commercial, but it would have ruined the film. Centring the film around James Leer would be a totally different story and film, requiring a substantially different plot to even work (much of the film doesn't even involve James Leer, so making him the narrator or taking from his POV would be very difficult when he doesn't even witness many of the events). What is the point in doing that?

It's an adaptation of a really good book, and I feel it would entirely miss the point of the book (and lose much of its humour) by changing it like that. I think the film could have turned a profit at the box office if it has been marketed better. I don't think it would ever have been a huge success because it's just not that commerical a topic, but to be honest I don't mind because instead we have a really good film to enjoy in the way it was intended to be enjoyed and not sullied to meet the expectations of the young cinema goer (who is already pretty well served)

But when I first saw the film I was approximately James Leers age, and I still enjoyed it thoroughly, and went on to read the book (which I also love). For that I am very grateful to the films makers.

[–] launlori 10 years ago

I agree with most of what people are saying here but this movie had practically zero marketing.

I love this film and it's on my list of must see films. It's sad to me that this movie was panned by everyone. There are so many great moments in the film.

I could replay the the little black guy "Vernon Hardapple" jumping on the front of car over and over again. That was some funny shi*.

Kelly: I'm under Evelyn Waugh.
Charlotte: Evelyn Waugh was a man.

[–] Kurt_Stein 9 years ago

I saw this movie in the theater in 2000 when it first came out. I thought that this was one of the worst and most boring movies I have ever seen in my entire life. I wanted to get up and leave about 15 minutes into the movie.

It astounds me that some people actually enjoyed this movie