MovieChat Forums > The Company Men (2011) Discussion > Why this movie failed commercially

Why this movie failed commercially


I went through pretty much the exact scenario faced by Bob Walker. One day in November 2008 I was called up to the boardroom at 5PM. I had just helped close a huge deal (as in $2BN in financing) the day before. I was doing "extra" work on tracking the debt market breakdown for partners at my firm. I thought I was pretty safe, then I was given a few boxes and told to pack my stuff and not come back on Monday.

Everything in this movie was completely plausible. Fortunately for my family, my wife's income was able to bridge the gap left between my lost income and our obligations, although three years later we still are no where near where we expected to be financially, nor are we "catching up". The complexity of the issues faced by people in this situation cannot be easily encapsulated into a simple formula - real estate pricing patterns, aggressive home financing, the cost of investing in "image" to attract business success, college costs, wage disparities, low-balling offers, unethical disregard by employers of personal sacrifice.

There were some stretches in this film, all of which seemed aimed at keeping it heading in the direction of an audience-acceptable ending.

The VP who is constantly trying to stick up for the employees... he would have been mothballed a long time ago - this guy is not just a dinosaur in the modern business world, he's totally extinct.

The sales manger's suicide driving the film toward a "turning point" funeral - seems to fit but in fact someone in his position is better situated to "readjust" to early retirement/underemployment than a 30-ish up-and-comer. These guys bought into the housing marked long enough ago not to have lost their shirt in the housing bubble burst. As of now, places like Brown are still offering guaranteed financial aid and deferred enrollment is always an option. They are close enough to medicare/social security age that even a few years working as the checker at Home Depot basically for minimum wage and health-care benefits won't substantially derail where they were heading.

And the six-figure sales rep who gets cut early in his career, while probably being over-leveraged to an extreme (but not implausible level) to keep pacing of his downfall at an interesting level, most certainly had a bigger safety net of local family than most young professionals who migrate to places like New York and Boston for the high paying jobs, and probably don't have anyone to fall back on to even babysit their kids while they go to a job interview, let alone that they can move in with or who will give them a job on a contract that is already close to breaking even.

That said, even with those stretches, the film was emotionally satisfying to watch for me. But people in my situation aren't going to step out to watch their lowest personal moments play out in a theater with dozens of strangers. The promoters of this film should have realized the way to sell this realism to the people who experienced it comes in the DVD / home viewing stage. Nor is a tagline like "the wrong guys just got fired" going to bring them out to the theater. It took some courage to tackle this subject matter head on, and not in some "fairy tale romance" way like Larry Crown. For that I thank the producers.

reply

Nice post. Well put.

FWIW, I agree.

reply

Well put, however for the casual viewer its hard to sympathise with guys earning huge amounts of money and with a lifestyle to match.

Its that man again!!

reply

Not only that but who wants to pay to see a movie that shows their fears that keep them up at night. It's s good movie but it's a subject that is close to the bone for everyone.

reply

I liked the ending of this movie, but yeah... I had trouble sympathize with anyone in this movie because I can't imagine myself not saving enough money to survive couple months without pay if I were making six figures. Affleck's character in the movie even had 12 weeks of pay. They were obviously living a lifestyle they couldn't afford and got what they deserved.

And I guess I'm not even the right target audience because hell, the main character's pay at the end, which was supposed to show how they didn't have all the luxuries anymore, is still about double my pay right now and something I can only dream of.
I'm a single guy who's out of college for only a few years so I didn't have all the responsibility like raising a child etc, but I earn pretty much the average salary in US, so I wouldn't be surprised if most film viewers would feel alienated in that regard as well.

Suicide by Phil, the sales manager, made no sense too. Like OP said, he could've taken a far less paying job and survive until social security, and Tommy Lee Jones' character even offered to pay for his daughter's pay. I would expect arrogant pride from hotshot MBA like the protagonist, but a guy who worked up his way from the bottom and experienced all the hardship? Swallow your pride and take the helping hand.

reply

One thing about the severance pay: it covered his base salary, but I get the impression that he relied on bonuses and commissions for the bulk of his money. He is a dumbass for not saving anything, but he must have thought that he needed the big house, fancy car, and country club membership to move up more throughout the company. I think that with the Great Recession, that's becoming less important, and a good credit rating is getting more important (possibly one of the reasons that he had a hard time finding a new job).

But, I think that maybe the reason that it struggled at the box office is that it may have fell into B movie territory. It wasn't a wide release smash hit like Transformers or an Adam Sandler movie, but at the same time, it wasn't an Oscars threat. I think that when most people are willing to watch a more serious smaller budget movie, they'd prefer to see a list of nominations.

reply

Thanks for your story, but you miss one crucial fact: This movie was released in 106 theaters -- which is paltry in the States. On another note, it gained about $4M dollars ... roughly $38000 per screen. That's okay numbers for that amount of screens, so people did see it - to say they're afraid of whatever "mirror" the movie holds up, or that it "hits too close to home", is quite an assumption. People don't give enough credit to the audiences.

>> It took some courage to tackle this subject matter head on, and not in some "fairy tale romance" way like Larry Crown.

The ending was a fairy tale romance. The rest of the story of Larry Crowne is not.

2014: Whiplash, Cold in July, that Terrence Malick project set in Austin

reply

The reason most films don't do as well at the box office as they should is that the studio doesn't spend as much on advertising or distribution as they should. They clearly didn't spend enough on publicizing this movie. I never heard of this movie when it was in theaters, but I was lucky to find on Netflix and I'm glad I did. I've seen it multiple times now.

reply

I don't remember when it was in theaters, but I found it on DVD recently and watched it for the first time. It was somewhat depressing, but I liked seeing what people did when faced with tremendous life changes. Good movie.

reply

Thanks for sharing.

reply