On the brink

"Fast 5" versus "Thor"?

In the eyes of industry insiders, this couldn't really be called a showdown. Not because the two films had different themes or styles, but because their distribution strategies from the very beginning were distinct. They also targeted slightly different audience demographics. More importantly, the essence and positioning of the two films were inherently dissimilar.

The rise of the "Fast & Furious" series had become something of a cliché in itself within the industry. Everyone knew it had started as an impromptu B-movie idea from Universal Pictures, with the first installment having a budget of only $38M. It didn't even meet the lowest standard for a blockbuster, which was $100M.

After achieving unexpectedly good box office results, Universal Pictures began considering sequels. However, the second film lacked Vin Diesel, and the third was without Paul Walker. The box office results declined with each installment, with the third film only grossing $60M in North America, causing financial distress for Universal Pictures. The studio was not known for handling sequels well, as even "Jurassic Park" had suffered from their mismanagement, let alone "Fast & Furious".

But Universal Pictures was running out of options.

Despite being one of the six major film companies, their strategy was consistently low-budget, with comedies under $60M being their bread and butter. Among the six, Universal invested the least in films costing over $100M, and they were also the least profitable. If it weren't for Universal Studios creating theme parks alongside their films, they would likely have been out of the Hollywood big six club sooner rather than later.

Feeling desperate, they brought back Vin Diesel and Paul Walker for "Fast & Furious 4", gritting their teeth to allocate an $80M budget in the hope of replicating the miracle of the first film. Against industry expectations, Universal Pictures actually succeeded.

Thus, the fifth installment was greenlit, and along with it, the addition of Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson.

"Fast 5" had a budget of $125M, officially entering the realm of big-budget blockbusters. Yet even so, it was still at the lower end of the scale among all the releases in the summer season this year, second only to "Super 8." However, it should be noted that "Super 8" was not in the summer season but in the spring season, and even within the spring season, its production costs were lower than Paramount's animated film, "Rango".

In other words, Universal Pictures, accustomed to being a smaller player, suddenly got rich, and yet they found themselves struggling to adapt to the new status quo, much like a "nouveau riche" struggling to fit into high society.

Just look at Universal Pictures' self-positioning, and it becomes clear. They wanted to avoid the crowded frenzy of the summer season, fearing being overshadowed by their competitors and ultimately losing money. But they were also unwilling to miss out on the most lucrative and concentrated box office season of the year, so they chose the first week of May, the week just before the official start of the summer season.

In the eyes of industry insiders, this release date had always been somewhat ambiguous. It straddled the tail end of the spring season when the market had not yet recovered, and the beginning of the summer season when audiences were not yet in full summer mode. The East Coast of the United States in early May still had bone-chilling winds, which were not conducive to boosting box office numbers. However, by hitching a ride on the leading edge of the summer season, they could capitalize on the media's early hype, rapidly raising awareness and achieving double the effect with minimal promotional efforts.

In this slot, films like "How to Train Your Dragon" had their premieres with moderate initial performance but achieved explosive box office success through word-of-mouth afterward. There were also films like "RV" that featured a star-studded cast and had strong initial momentum but ended up being a financial nightmare for the production company. Of course, more often than not, mid to low-budget thrillers like "Disturbia" occupied this slot, capitalizing on the buzz.

From this, one could discern Universal Pictures' positioning. Despite their lack of confidence, they still clung to a glimmer of hope, aiming to continue the decent performance of the fourth installment without harboring grand ambitions but also not willing to give up.

In contrast, "Thor" was on a roll and exuding confidence.

On one hand, this film was one of the last two productions made under Paramount's rights before Disney completed the acquisition of Marvel. The other film was "Captain America". After these two, due to copyright-related issues, how Marvel adaptations would be filmed and how cooperation would take place between Paramount and Disney remained to be negotiated.

As a result, Paramount hoped to make a fortune from these two films, concentrating an abundance of resources on their promotion. The reason for choosing "Thor" to lead the way instead of "Captain America" primarily lay in the influence of Natalie Portman and Anthony Hopkins, both Oscar winners. Additionally, Kenneth Branagh was a highly regarded director. Expectations for the film's box office performance were high.

Disney, on the other hand, aimed to gauge the market's response through the box office performance of these two films and then make corresponding adjustments for the upcoming Marvel Cinematic Universe. Naturally, Disney didn't mind using its own resources to boost the profile of its longtime rival, Paramount.

The most direct manifestation of this collaboration was the one-week buffer period between the release of "Pirates of the Caribbean 4" and "Thor". In a year where major films were clashing for release dates and they had to steer clear of the massive conclusion of "Harry Potter", Disney's move was quite remarkable.

On the other hand, "Thor" was the vanguard of this year's superhero blockbusters, making an early appearance on the scene. Its market performance was undoubtedly highly anticipated, not only by their rival Warner Bros. and 20th Century Fox but also by others in the industry who would be closely observing and possibly making adjustments to their own film promotion strategies based on its performance.

Being the first to venture into uncharted waters could be either a good thing or a bad thing.

To say the least, "Thor" was a film that had concentrated all the attention. Thanks to the flood of positive reviews from its early internal screenings, it was clear that Paramount had great confidence in it. The entire industry was eagerly awaiting the film's explosive performance, with some even predicting that its premiere box office could surpass the $100M mark.

While breaking the $100M threshold on the opening weekend was no longer headline news, especially considering that in the past three years, more and more films had harnessed the power of strong marketing and promotion to focus their firepower on the opening weekend and achieved excellent results. But compared to the entire market, they were still in the minority. Up to this point, only seventeen films had achieved such a feat.

Now, "Thor" was poised to become the eighteenth, indicating the high expectations people had for it.

In other words, "Fast 5" and "Thor", though released one after the other, were initially not even considered comparable. It seemed like they were from entirely different leagues, not even proper competitors. They were just two films with similar release dates, nothing more.

But when the news from the Vanity Fair column came out, all of North America went into a frenzy.

First, there was the showdown between Chris and Natalie's ex-roommates, and then the face-off between Chris and Natalie, the new-generation acting titans. It transcended the confines of their respective films and gradually evolved into a personal rivalry. The gossip fire ignited instantly, especially in the latter case. It was like a powder keg, ready to explode at the slightest spark.

The controversy surrounding "Body-double Gate" was undoubtedly the biggest highlight of this year's award season, and it even gave Annette Bening hope of winning an award. However, it ultimately concluded with Natalie's victory. Now, even though the Oscar awards had already been handed out, it didn't mean that the media's scrutiny would end.

If everything about "Body-double Gate" were confirmed, would Natalie be considered to have "stolen" an Oscar? Even if not, her act of deception was bound to face condemnation from industry insiders. Undoubtedly, this matter would stick to Natalie like a stubborn stain, following her around for a long time.

What they didn't expect was that an opportunity would come so quickly.

Strictly speaking, the scandal had no direct connection to Chris. He wasn't even a direct participant; he wasn't in the know. But the indirect connection was intricate and complex. Without Chris, it was possible that "Body-double Gate" might never have been exposed.

Now, Chris and Natalie were once again entangled in this web, and this time, they were directly engaged in a head-on confrontation. Even though neither of them was the absolute lead in their respective films, the media, regardless of everything, had their focus squarely on these two, eagerly swarming towards them once again.

"Wow, this shouldn't be a question for me." When reporters surrounded Natalie and asked about the upcoming summer box office showdown, she flashed a brilliant smile. "I'm not the one carrying the burden of box office success." Natalie, the wise one, with a glint of intelligence in her eyes, was always capable of effortlessly diffusing crises.

It wasn't a matter of dodging responsibility; it was a playful comment on the state of the summer box office in 2011, which was still dominated by male-led films. "Thor" was a typical summer blockbuster, targeting a male audience. Of course, this statement had a double meaning, emphasizing that she wasn't the main character, thereby avoiding the most intense scrutiny.

"I'm currently in the honeymoon period, enjoying rare time with my child." Just a short while ago, Natalie had given birth, and she brought up this topic once more. Reporters couldn't continue to press her harshly after this clever deflection. She concluded with, "As for my involvement in the film, its landing in the summer box office itself is an affirmation. What happens next is up to the professionals to decide."

With a small effort, Natalie deflected attention away from herself using the topic of her child.

"So, do you have confidence in the box office of "Thor"?" Reporters, of course, weren't willing to let Natalie off so easily and repeated the same question over and over again. Natalie, however, remained unruffled. Her smile became even more enchanting, radiating the radiance of motherhood. "Of course, why wouldn't I? Otherwise, I wouldn't have taken on this film in the first place."

And so, the media reported it as: "Natalie Portman: I Have Full Confidence in the Box Office of "Thor"!"