'Olympus Has Fallen' vs. 'White House Down': And the Battle of Other Nearly Identical Movies
(Photo: Columbia | FilmDistrict)
It's hard to watch the trailer for Channing Tatum's upcoming action flick without a lingering sense of deja vu. "I could have sworn this movie already existed, only I remember it having the half-naked guy from that gladiator movie instead of the half-naked guy from that stripper movie," you'll think to yourself. And you'll be right, because you'll be thinking of Gerard Butler's recent Olympus Has Fallen, which, like Tatum's White House Down (out later this year), is basically Die Hard meets Air Force One.
It seems like a flawed strategy making two movies with near carbon copy premises and releasing them within months of each other but the Hollywood studios have been doing it for decades. Think of it as the place where lack of creativity meets the spirit of competition. It's in that spirit of competition that we pit these like-minded cinematic pairs against each other in a scientific (read: completely subjective) breakdown to determine which is the better version of the same thing.
Release Dates:
SWATH: June 1, 2012
Mirror Mirror: March 30, 2012
Taglines:
SWATH: The fairytale is over.
Mirror Mirror: The Snow White legend comes alive.
Mirror Mirror isn't even trying. At least SWATH's suggests something dark and new.
Star Power: Between the two films, Julia Roberts might be the most widely known actor, but Kirsten Stewart was easily the most buzzworthy thanks to the following she built with the Twilight Saga. Add Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and Charlize Theron to the mix and SWATH is easily the winner in the star power department.
Critical Success: Surprisingly, while audiences ignored Mirror Mirror, critics gave it a two percent edge on Rotten Tomatoes.
SWATH: 48%
Mirror Mirror: 50%
Commercial Success: When it comes to the box office, Mirror Mirror isn't even in the same ballpark. The KStew vehicle crushed, more than doubling the take of its competitor.
SWATH: $396 million
Mirror Mirror: $166 million
Legacy: Despite it's success, Snow White and the! Huntsman! left an even bigger mark on the pop culture landscape when it was revealed Stewart was hooking up with the director, Rupert Sanders. Not exactly new territory in Hollywood, except Sanders was married and Stewart was supposed to be in a relationship with her Twilight co-star, Robert Pattinson. As far as Mirror Mirror, it'll likely just be remembered as "that other Snow White movie."
Verdict: No question, SWATH is more memorable, made more money, was more popular with fans, and had more A-list talent. In the head-to-head fairytale battle, it's the clear winner.
Deep Impact vs. Armageddon
Release Dates:
Deep Impact: May 8, 1998
Armageddon: July 1, 1998
Taglines:
Deep Impact: Oceans rise. Cities fall. Hope survives.
Armageddon: For love. For honor. For mankind.
Wow. Even the tagline formats are the same, so it's a toss-up as to what's more compelling. Deep Impact's tagline does remind us of the one key difference in these doomsday movies: It's the one where the asteroid actually hits the planet, so points for being more depressing...?
Star Power: Besides Morgan Freeman, can you name anyone else in Deep Impact? Armageddon! was a mo! nster ensemble lead by Bruce Willis, a pre-Gigli Ben Affleck, and Liv Tyler. Plus, you got a young Owen Wilson, Steve Buscemi, Billy Bob Thornton, and Michael Clarke Duncan (RIP) rounding out the expectedly ragtag crew.
Critical Success: Critics didn't have much love for either disaster movie, but if they were forced make a recommendation, they'd pick against the one were Bruce Willis blows himself up. Martyrdom isn't big with film buffs, apparently.
Deep Impact: 47%
Armageddon: 39%
Commercial Success: Because Armageddon was so heavily marketed, you may not have realized Deep Impact broke the $300 million barrier. People were really starved for crap-hitting-the-earth movies back in 1998. Still, the extra marketing push paid off, because Armageddon earned $200 million more at the box office.
Deep Impact: $349 million
Armageddon: $553 million
Legacy: We have Armageddon to thank for Aerosmith's c! omeback. ! You couldn't listen to the radio or watch MTV for more than five minutes without hearing "I Don't Want to Miss a Thing." Deep Impact, on the other hand, gave us President Morgan Freeman.
Verdict: Yes, Deep Impact was a better movie, held up at the box office, and was first to the big screen, but come on, ask anyone to associate "asteroid" with a movie, and they're gonna say Armageddon. Despite being another Michael Bay turd, it has staying power.
Release Dates:
Antz: October 2, 1998
A Bug's Life: November 25, 1998
Taglines:
Antz: See the world from a whole new perspective.
A Bug's Life: An epic of miniature proportions.
Not a lot of difference here. Basically: "Ever wonder what it's like to be a bug? We'll tell you, and we'll make it cute."
Star Power: Bug's Life had Kevin Spacey and Julia Louis-Dreyfus, but that was about it when it came to A-listers. Antz, on the other hand, was J.Lo and a list of Hollywood legends: Woody Allen, Anne Bancroft, Danny Glover, Sylvester Stallone, Jane Curtain, Dan Aykroyd, and Sharon Stone.
Critical Success: Critics love tiny creatures with human hangups. Who knew? They were released within two months of each other and both still managed to win reviewers almost ! unanimous! ly.
Antz: 95%
A Bug's Life: 92%
Commercial Success: Antz was first and more positively reviewed (slightly) by critics, but A Bug's Life still doubled its box office take. Just goes to show you: Never underestimate the Disney marketing machine.
Antz: $171 million
A Bug's Life: $363 million
Legacy: A Bug's Life proved that Pixar was more than just a one-trick pony, setting the stage for the studio to be a paragon of modern animation. Antz introduced a generation of children to Woody Allen's bumbling social anxiety and dry one-liners.
Verdict: Both films were successful on all counts, but because of the Pixar association, A Bug's Life will always be thought of as the more memorable film.
Shared Plot: Frustrated with the dating game, long-time besties decide to take things to the bedroom with the expressed agreement that it's just sex. But it's never just sex, right? Feelings get hurt, declarations of love are made, etc., etc.Release Dates:
No Strings Attached: January 21, 2011
Friends with Benefits: July 22, 2011
Taglines:
No Strings Attached: Friendship has its benefits.
Friends with Benefits: Friendship is a four-letter word.
Well, No Strings Attached effectively used the title of it's competitor as its tagline. Bal! lsy move.! Friends with Benefits' tagline doesn't even make sense "friendship" is clearly more than four... Ohhhh, now I get it. Clever girl.
Star Power: If you had to rank the leads (most to least notable), it'd go something like this: Natalie Portman, Justin Timberlake, Mila Kunis, Ashton Kutcher. So, by law of averages, these movies cancel each other out.
Critical Success: Same premise, different results. Chalk it up to the ongoing Kutcher backlash, the inescapable Timberlake charm, or something else altogether, critics clearly preferred FWB to its predecessor.
No Strings Attached: 49%
Friends with Benefits: 71%
Commercial Success: Based on the kind of money each film made at the box office, it's safe to say people are way more curious about sleeping with their best friends than they let on.
No Strings Attached: $147 million
Friends with Benefits: $149 million
Legacy: No Strings Attached will forever be the pitfall movie that took a little shine off Natalie Portman's Oscar win that should have elevated her above taking such projects. Friends with Benefits solidified both Kunis and Timberlake as viable comic leads.
Verdict: These are both supposed to be comedies, right? Then the title of "better movie" should go to the one that's actually funny. Congratulations, Friends with Benefits.
First Daughter vs. Chasing Liberty
Shared Plot: ! The teenage daughter of the POTUS wants her independence so she ditches the White House and the overbearing Secret Service, only to fall in love with an undercover agent assigned to keep an eye on her. (Yes, all that happens in both movies.)Release Dates:
First Daughter: September 24, 2004
Chasing Liberty: January 9, 2004
Taglines:
First Daughter: The girl who always stood out is finally getting the chance to fit in.
Chasing Liberty: Every family has a rebel. Even the First Family.
No comment.
Star Power: Katie Holmes and Mandy Moore are a wash, so it comes down to the male leads: Marc Blucas (Blucas?) or Matthew Goode? Since Goode has actually had a few relevant films in the last few years, he gives the edge to Chasing Liberty.
Critical Success: Ouch. The tales of angst-y young women who see themselves as political prisoners did not resonate with the critics. Neither film could crack 20 percent on Rotten Tomatoes.
First Daughter: 8%
Chasing Liberty: 19%
Commercial Success: Yikes. Looks like the movie-going public felt the same way the critics did. Nobody went to see these movies. NOBODY. They couldn't even recoup their budgets at the box office.
First Daughter: $1! 0.5 milli! on
Chasing Liberty: $12.1 million
Legacy: Let's see: No A-list talent, near unanimous negative reviews, and the label of box office failure. Yeah, the legacy here is probably never make a movie about the president's daughter.
Verdict: If you enemy's method of torture is to make you watch one of these films, you should probably pick Chasing Liberty. It was a nominal improvement on all fronts, which isn't saying much.
Dante's Peak vs. Volcano
Shared Plot: A volcano everyone suspected was inactive suddenly decides to explode.Release Dates:
Dante's Peak: February 7, 1997
Volcano: April 25, 1997
Taglines:
Dante's Peak: The pressure is building...
Volcano: The coast is toast.
Haha..."The coast is toast." That's just a classic right there.
Star Power: Remember when people cared about Anne Heche? That was 1997 for you. She was oddly paired with Tommy Lee Jones in Volcano, whereas Dante's Peak made James Bond Pierce Brosnan a volcanologist (a real thing) working with the woman from the Terminator movies (Linda Hamilton). Hard to pick a more compelling ! duo, so w! e'll go with the Dante's Peak team on account of that fancy accent of Mr. Bronsan's.
Critical Success: Disaster movies always have a hard time winning over critics, and rebel volcanoes are no different.
Dante's Peak: 27%
Volcano: 44%
Commercial Success: The public must have had volcano fatigue after Dante's Peak. That, or people just like a rural volcano better than an urban volcano.
Dante's Peak: $178 million
Volcano: $122 million
Legacy: Dante's Peak was the movie that distracted you from all the incredulous volcano science with an even more outrageous scene in which an old lady manages to push a boat across an acid lake. Volcano was the movie that thought it was a good idea to make Tommy Lee Jones an action star.
Verdict: This one's kind of a push. Nothing really sets one apart from the other, so we'll go with Volcano as the winner because, come on, "The coast is toast." Gold.
Shared Plot: A biopic of Truman Capote's time researching his book In Cold Blood that focuses on his relationship with convicted killer Perry Smith.Release Dates:
Capote: February 3, 2006
Infamous: October 13, 2006
Taglines:
Capote: none
Infamous: There's more to the story than you know.
Jeez, Capote, too lazy for a! ta! gline? All you had to do was pun the fact that the movie tells the story behind the story.
Star Power: Everyone remembers Philip Seymour Hoffman more than Toby Jones when it comes to the Truman Capote role, but Infamous actually had a more star-studded ensemble. The low profile of Jones was buoyed by the likes of Gwyneth Paltrow, Sigourney Weaver, Sandra Bullock, Jeff Daniels, and Daniel Craig.
Critical Success: Critics love a good biopic, which explains why each film is "certified fresh" on Rotten Tomatoes, but this were a report card, Capote would be in the honors track while Infamous was applying to state schools.
Capote: 90%
Infamous: 72%
Commercial Success: One Truman Capote movie was all the public could handle, apparently. When it came to box office receipts, Infamous couldn't even equal Hoffman's Capote salary.
Capote: $49.2 million
Infamous: $2.6 million
Legacy: Capote will be remembered as the movie that earned Hoffman his first Oscar and picked up a few other nominations along the way. Unfortunately, Infamous will probably be remembered as the Capote movie that didn't have Hoffman, so why bother.
Verdict: Capote soaked up all the prestige and attention until there was nothing left for Infamous even with its robust supporting cast. You could call it a case of bad timing, but it's more likely Capote was just a better movie.
Shared Plot: A tale of magician(s) pitted in a life-and-death rivalry, set in turn-of-the-century ! Europe, a! nd featuring a mix of fictional and historical figures. (To be fair, there are a lot of differences between the two films, but, come on, two big-time movies about magicians in less than months?)Release Dates:
The Prestige: October 20, 2006
The Illusionist: September 1, 2006
Taglines:
The Prestige: Are you watching closely?
The Illusionist: Nothing is what it seems.
The only thing these two on-the-nose slogans are missing is an abracadabra.
Star Power: Edward Norton and Christian Bale cancel each other out. Paul Giamatti and Michael Caine cancel each other out. And Jessica Biel isn't even in the same ballpark as Scarlett Johansson, which leaves the advantage to Prestige. Never mind the fact that it also has Hugh Jackman in a starring role and David Bowie in a supporting one. No contest.
Critical Succe! ss: If you go by reviews, then these films are basically interchangeable.
The Prestige: 76%
The Illusionist: 74%
Commercial Success: The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing movie fans they needed to see two magic movies in two months.
The Prestige: $109 million
The Illusionist: $87.9 million
Legacy: Both films proved there was a place for an adult version of Harry Potter.
Verdict: If you really want to learn which of these films is better, all you need to know is one of these movies was directed by Christopher Nolan and the other wasn't. You win Prestige; you always do.
Shared Plot: A cop reluctantly takes on a dog for a partner, learns to bond with the pooch, and together they take down a massive crime ring.Release Dates:
Turner & Hooch: July 28, 1989
K-9: April 28, 1989
Taglines:
Turner & Hooch: The oddest couple ever unleashed!
K-9: Meet the two toughest cops in town one's just a little smarter than the other.
You have a dog pun and an insult wrapped in a compliment. Dog pun wins every time, right? (Of course, K-9 spent all it's word play brainpower on the title, so its tagline is understandable.)
Star Power: Even the biggest James Belushi fan in the world (if one exists) would have to admit to Tom Hanks' outright dominance in this category. So unless you just really, really love German Shepherds, Turner & Hooch is the star power champ.
Critical Success: Allow FilmCritic.com's review of K-9 to sum this one up: Tom Hanks' dog flick stunk; how good do you think James Belushi's is?" In a choice between the lesser of two evils, always pick Hanks.
Turner & Hooch: 62%
K-9: 22%
Commercial Success: Never underestimate the draw of a family-friendly movie. Kids love goofy physical humor, especially when it involves animal hijinks, and parents love something that will distract their kids long enough to offer a two-hour nap in a darkened movie theater. Translation: Both films were a win at the box office.
Turner & Hooch: $71 million
K-9: $78.2 million
Legacy: Turner & Hooch proved Hanks could be charismatic acting opposite a slobbery hound, while K-9 just made everyone with John Belushi was still alive.
Verdict: At the risk of sounding redundant, Turner & Hooch has Tom Hanks in his comedic prime. Case closed.
Related Articles:
Comments
Post a Comment