‘Avengers’ Opens With Stealth but Little Box-Office Wealth

Time to put away the bumbershoot, Mr. Steed.

Warner Bros.’ $60-million “The Avengers,” a glitzy remake of the hit ‘60s British spy TV series, did not live up to the studio’s hope of creating an action franchise. The film, starring Uma Thurman, Ralph Fiennes and Sean Connery, opened in third place last weekend to $10.3 million box office, somewhat shy of the anticipated $13-million to $15-million take.

The studio had hoped that a series of “Avengers” films could replace Warner’s tiring or iffy “Batmans,” “Supermans” and “Lethal Weapons.” Many in Hollywood are already chalking the high-profile property as a disappointment.

It has been tougher than usual for Warner Bros. since this studio usually ranks No. 1 or 2 in box-office market share every year, especially during the summer season. This season its best performers have been, in order of release, “City of Angels” with $78 million, “A Perfect Murder” with $67 million and “Lethal Weapon 4” with $122 million so far.

Warners spent about $40 million marketing “The Avengers,” then dodged pre-opening critical reviews by not holding advance press screenings. There was no premiere, either.

When studios think they have a hit on their hands, they court reviews and pre-opening stories with the film’s stars to help promote the movie. “It’s called free publicity. You can’t buy that kind of advertising and we all know it,” one Warners executive said.

The studio had said it was concerned critics would unfairly compare the movie’s stars to those of the TV series (which aired in the U.S. from 1966 to 1969 and in Britain from 1961 to 1969).

“It did pretty well considering there was no word of mouth and no reviews. But usually a big studio movie opening in August could do about $15 million,” said Paul Dergarabedian, president of the box-office tracking firm Exhibitor Relations. “But when you consider all the negative publicity that has surrounded this movie, these results are really interesting to watch.

“What it tells you is that the average moviegoer in the middle part of this country doesn’t pay attention to Hollywood bad press and insider stuff. The trailer on this movie was pretty cool--that’s what got people in the theaters.”

Dergarabedian, like other exhibitors interviewed, said chances are the bulk of moviegoers age 18 to 24 wouldn’t be familiar with the TV series.

“The people who were fans of that show are in their [40s and] 50s, so hoping to get a big turnout by playing off that is a real long shot,” one AMC exhibitor said. “That group doesn’t turn out in force. They rent videos.”

“Look, no matter what your motivations are for not having a movie reviewed in advance it will always be viewed as a big negative, a real red flag,” Dergarabedian said. “But a movie is the studio’s property and they can do anything they want with it.

“If they had had some early negative reviews it may have turned some people away,” he continued. “But that’s what’s interesting about ‘Avengers.’ There was some negative publicity and they came anyway. But this week will be the real test.”

So far this week the film has maintained a third-place ranking at the box office, behind “Saving Private Ryan” and “How Stella Got Her Groove Back.”