Bandidas

[Brian in Mesa]

Bandidas

Release Date: January 6, 2006
Studio: 20th Century Fox
Director: Joachim Roenning, Espen Sandberg
Screenwriter: Luc Besson, Robert Mark Kamen
Genre: Adventure, Comedy
MPAA Rating: Not Available
Website: Not Available

Starring: Penelope Cruz, Salma Hayek, Steve Zahn, Dwight Yoakam, Joe Reitman

Plot Summary: A comedy-adventure set in 1888 Mexico, in which two women – one a European-educated sophisticate, the other a rough-and-tumble peasant — reluctantly join forces to fight a ruthless enforcer… by becoming celebrated bank robbers.

 

[Chaplin]

Um... yeah. I'll be seeing this one.

 

[Bada0Bing]

It looks like this is finally getting released in the US on September 22nd.

 

[Russ Smith]

I just hope Salma isn't in the mask for most of the movie!

 

[Cheesebeef]

I just hope Salma isn't in the mask for most of the movie!

I just hope that mask is ALL Salma's in for most of the movie.

Will people actually pay money to see this drek?

 

[Chaplin]

Produced by Luc Besson and starring the two biggest Hispanic actresses in an action-western? You don't think there's a market for that?

 

[Russ Smith]

I just hope that mask is ALL Salma's in for most of the movie.

Will people actually pay money to see this drek?

I don't know about people, but I certainly will.

I don't know if this is one of the movies she's involved in beyond just acting or not. In general those movies tend to off the beaten track and interesting, the ones she's just acting in tend to just feature her looks.

She's quite involved in the new tv show Ugly Betty, even going to play a part in the first show. Apparently it's based on a Mexican novella and she helped bring it to the US.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Produced by Luc Besson and starring the two biggest Hispanic actresses in an action-western? You don't think there's a market for that?

Nope. My guess is that it makes 6 million opening weekend at most and is out of the top ten one week later.

Luc Besson doesn't mean squat to most anyone outside of NY and LA, Westerns historically do horribly, neither actress is a box-office draw by themselves, there's been ZERO advertising for the film and it was delayed by almost a year- all that shows to me is a studio dump in Sept.

Or in other words, DOA.

 

[Chaplin]

Nope. My guess is that it makes 6 million opening weekend at most and is out of the top ten one week later.

Luc Besson doesn't mean squat to most anyone outside of NY and LA, Westerns historically do horribly, neither actress is a box-office draw by themselves, there's been ZERO advertising for the film and it was delayed by almost a year- all that shows to me is a studio dump in Sept.

Or in other words, DOA.

I don't know if I completely agree with you, but I think your theory is certainly plausible.

I actually look at the first Transporter film, which was also produced by Besson. And at the time, Jason Statham wasn't really that well known, yet the movie made over $9mil at the box office on opening weekend en route to a little over $25mil domestic. Of course, this movie was made for home video and it arguably made enough to make Statham a "star". Those of us that love Snatch might disagree, but it was The Transporter, not Snatch, that made him a viable leading man, which he has become over the past few years.

Looking at Bandidas, however, that movie has 2 known stars and arguably more bankable than Statham was in 2002. But like you said, advertising is nil for this movie, so it can go either way. And it isn't a bad cast, with Steve Zahn and the underrated Dwight Yoakum in the film.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I don't know if I completely agree with you, but I think your theory is certainly plausible.

I actually look at the first Transporter film, which was also produced by Besson. And at the time, Jason Statham wasn't really that well known, yet the movie made over $9mil at the box office on opening weekend en route to a little over $25mil domestic. Of course, this movie was made for home video and it arguably made enough to make Statham a "star". Those of us that love Snatch might disagree, but it was The Transporter, not Snatch, that made him a viable leading man, which he has become over the past few years.

Looking at Bandidas, however, that movie has 2 known stars and arguably more bankable than Statham was in 2002. But like you said, advertising is nil for this movie, so it can go either way. And it isn't a bad cast, with Steve Zahn and the underrated Dwight Yoakum in the film.

name me the last successful FEMALE action movie not based on a comic book or a video game? Hell, even Elektra and Catwoman were certifiable BOMBS and both of their leads were much more established at the box office than Cruz or Selma.

Bad genre, non-bankable stars - thi has The Quick And The Dead written all over it (or whatever the hell the name of that Sharon Stone western was).

Oh - and the difference between this and the Transporter - MALE action lead - that's a MAJOR difference. The very idea of Cruz in an action movie likely makes the majority of the movie going audience roll their eyes, and likely Selam without Antonio does as well.

 

[Chaplin]

Well, here's my thoughts:

1) Salma in a western will bring people in that remember her in Desperado, regardless if Antonio Banderas is in it or not.

2) We're not talking about blockbuster status here.

I'm not saying you're wrong, you may well be right, but you're original post assumed there wasn't an audience for this movie, and I disagree with that. According to IMDB, the budget is at $35,000,000. That, to me, is really, really high for this kind of movie, considering that The Transporter's budget was reportedly only around $28,000,000.

I find it funny that you bring up Quick and the Dead, which made a ton of money on video, and actually is a pretty good movie.

I'd like to see Jason Statham of 2002 vs. Salma Hayek & Penelope Cruz of 2006 stack up against each other. I understand the male vs. female thing, but it's not like Statham is Tom Cruise here. Him being simply male is not a big enough reason vs. someone like Salma Hayek. Statham now is bankable, but he wasn't back in 2002.

And Catwoman and Elektra are bad examples to use because Elektra made almost $15 million in its opening weekend and Catwoman made almost $17 million. That's pretty good. Over the long haul, word-of-mouth killed those movies. Also, both of them were big-studio pictures. Bandidas is being distributed by Fox, but it was financed almost exclusively overseas. Totally different movies.

I think that the advertising is going to make a difference. Bandidas hasn't been marketed. I tend to think there is some truth in your estimation that it won't make any money (especially with that budget), but I can't completely agree that there isn't an audience for it. Hell, I'm going to go see it.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Well, here's my thoughts:

1) Salma in a western will bring people in that remember her in Desperado, regardless if Antonio Banderas is in it or not.

2) We're not talking about blockbuster status here.

I'm not saying you're wrong, you may well be right, but you're original post assumed there wasn't an audience for this movie, and I disagree with that. According to IMDB, the budget is at $35,000,000. That, to me, is really, really high for this kind of movie, considering that The Transporter's budget was reportedly only around $28,000,000.

I find it funny that you bring up Quick and the Dead, which made a ton of money on video, and actually is a pretty good movie.

I'd like to see Jason Statham of 2002 vs. Salma Hayek & Penelope Cruz of 2006 stack up against each other. I understand the male vs. female thing, but it's not like Statham is Tom Cruise here. Him being simply male is not a big enough reason vs. someone like Salma Hayek. Statham now is bankable, but he wasn't back in 2002.

And Catwoman and Elektra are bad examples to use because Elektra made almost $15 million in its opening weekend and Catwoman made almost $17 million. That's pretty good. Over the long haul, word-of-mouth killed those movies. Also, both of them were big-studio pictures. Bandidas is being distributed by Fox, but it was financed almost exclusively overseas. Totally different movies.

I think that the advertising is going to make a difference. Bandidas hasn't been marketed. I tend to think there is some truth in your estimation that it won't make any money (especially with that budget), but I can't completely agree that there isn't an audience for it. Hell, I'm going to go see it.

1) The Quick and The Dead - 32 million dollar budget - 18 million dollar domestic and made a "ton of money" on video sales? That strikes me as odd since it was really only since the advent of DVD and it's effect on the markte has anyone used home entertainment as a harbringer of success. Thus, I use that movie as an example - regardless of it's worth or not - that's not the issue - the issue is it tanked at the Box Office because there's not a big markte for this kind of stuff.

2) You could throw out the opening number for Elektra and Catwoman and say - "pretty impressive", but you know as well as I do that the Catwoman numbers were PATHETIC for an "event summer blockbuster" and it's one of the bigger bombs of the last few years. Even so, both of those movie came and went with hardly a whimper AND they had built in audiences.

I'm still waiting for you to show me evidence of a female-led action movie that wasn't a comic-book (Elektra and Catwoman - even as bad examples which failed miserably) or based off a video-game that was actually successful. There's just not a big market for that kind of film and when you throw in the Western angle, I believe the number will bear that market out to be close to absolutely nothing.

Come on Chap - you know why movies which are delayed seem to get dumpe din September - it's because they are crap and it's not gonna hurt the studio to bring it out when nothing else is out there. This movie screams crap to me and I'm sure it will to the restof the viewing public. That's not to say it WILL be crap - it could be very good, but it ain't gonna make a cent worth talking about in the theaters.

 

[Chaplin]

It definitely has an audience, the question is if that audience will pay the overinflated price of a movie ticket to see it. Like I said before, and I don't know if you read this part or not, I generally agree with you that it won't make a lot of money. My main disagreement was about whether there is an audience for this movie, and I believe there is.

Then again, it's also not a big-studio movie and sounds like it might have been a little fun to make, so maybe that was the motivation to make it. Shawshank didn't make all that much in its theatrical run (although it did break even), now it's considered the best movie of the 90s, and one of the best ever made. Its home video take is huge.

 

[Cheesebeef]

It definitely has an audience, the question is if that audience will pay the overinflated price of a movie ticket to see it. Like I said before, and I don't know if you read this part or not, I generally agree with you that it won't make a lot of money. My main disagreement was about whether there is an audience for this movie, and I believe there is.

I guess that audience wasn't big enough to even get this thing to theaters in the US.

did it come out ANYWHERE? Even in Los Angeles, I didn't see this open anywhere.

 

[Mike Olbinski]

It's out on DVD it seems.

http://www.bandidasdvd.com/

Mike

 

[Bada0Bing]

I just watched it. I had a tremendously difficult time trying to determine who was hotter in those outfits. This was really silly, and actually pretty funny.

 

[Russ Smith]

I just watched it. I had a tremendously difficult time trying to determine who was hotter in those outfits. This was really silly, and actually pretty funny.

Yep, my girlfriend gave me crap for renting it but she was laughing too.

Not a great movie, it was what I expected.

Salma was hotter btw.