The particulars of The Lone Ranger’s budget woes have been so strong a matter of public record that it perhaps, even in small doses, dulled curiosity and anticipation among certain crowds. To those who observe this sort of thing, however, the 2011 kerfuffle was no surprise: director Gore Verbinski had, rather notoriously, helped inflate production costs on the second and third Pirates of the Caribbean films, those back-to-back sequels managing to rack up a production price more than $530 million large — while the second of these, At World’s End, is ranked (by some estimates) as the most expensive production in film history. Every other western should only require a man, a horse and a gun, but one FROM THE TEAM THAT BROUGHT YOU [ADORNED SKULL AND FLAMING TORCHES WHICH FORM AN “X”] was bound to get big for its britches when painting the iconic old west.
But Verbinski hasn’t always played in the expensive sandbox; even excepting 2011’s smaller-scale western, Rango, the early days are marked by simpler, even (gasp!) character-driven work — and they don’t cost as much, either. With The Lone Ranger’s dismal opening weekend surely not getting some amendment over the rest of its domestic performance — regardless of those easy-to-please, mainstream cinema-killing foreign markets being depended upon to carry the rest of its weight — one has to wonder (and just as many will hope) if the director will ever return to humble outings that recall The Mexican or The Weather Man.
It might sound preposterous — especially when you consider the pay day which, here, has undoubtedly fallen into his lap — but such a trend is already in swing. It started, somehow, with an exception of sorts: Michael Bay’s Pain & Gain, less the exhaustively bombastic action-comedy of past outings, more than ever a tightly packed round of insanity-fueled laughs. That he was following a billion-dollar grosser and is currently filming that film’s sure-to-succeed sequel warrants the “exception” tag — despite helping commence things, too — but the project is nevertheless a sign of what’s coming. In only the past few months we’ve seen three once-lucrative, since-flagging commercial helmers attach themselves to comparatively small titles: Tim Burton, off Dark Shadows and Frankeneweenie, handling Big Eyes; Jon Favreau, following Iron Man 2 and Cowboys & Aliens, next helming Chef; and M. Night Shyamalan, licking some more wounds in the wake of After Earth, tackling a currently untitled family drama. When was the last time that happened?
Here’s a glance at those three:
Big Eyes (Tim Burton; 2014)
In all fairness to Burton — and it is a rare occasion when this writer would pay him a compliment — the scaling-back has already been set into effect, no matter how gradual. Not where you’d think, however — i.e., the esoteric black comedy based on a hokey late ‘60s soap opera — because that came with a bill of over $150 million. Dark Shadows flopped in the United States — though (surprise!) had the slack picked up by international crowds — and, later that year, Burton released Frankenweenie, a (relatively speaking) small and “personal” work that earned back some favor with critics and the paying public.
Hopefully continuing that run is Big Eyes, a character drama/biopic scripted by Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski — those behind the director’s finest work, Ed Wood. The positive association is one thing; further to its credit is the apparent opportunity for Burton to blend a long-known (and heavily parodied) interest in the visually off-kilter with, at long last, a beating human heart. A year ago, the mere idea of a collaboration with Christoph Waltz and Amy Adams would’ve been gag-inducing, the news coming with an understandable presumption that two fine performers would be adorned in strange costumes and asked to flit around the screen because it strikes Burton as comical. By our count, the true-to-life story of Walter and Margaret Keane is demanding less of the theatrics that plagued Alice in Wonderland or Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, instead focusing more on the artistic struggles so intrinsic to Ed Wood‘s appeal. And with The Weinstein Company acquiring the film to produce and distribute, it also marks the first time Burton has not worked with one of the major studios.
Chef (Jon Favreau; May 9, 2014)
Remember Cowboys & Aliens? Or Iron Man 2, for that matter? No? Given the reactions to both (not to mention the former’s commercial performance), Jon Favreau would probably like to keep those out of the public memory for good. After a few projects failed to gain proper traction — including the sure-to-be-big Disney project/advertisement Magic Kingdom — he’s coming back for Chef, which sounds like his most modest effort since Made, his directorial debut.
Gone are the flying metal suits and extraterrestrial crafts — barring a sharp 2nd-act turn — and in their place is the story of a man (Favreau) running a food truck. This is not a major studio project, either, but an enterprise backed by Open Road Films; even with notable names taking part in the action — mainly Robert Downey Jr. and Scarlett Johansson — it’s clear, this far out, that Chef marks a notable reduction in scope. Given the recent turn of things, we can hardly believe this is accidental.
Untitled M. Night Shyamalan Film (TBD)
Although yours truly genuinely enjoyed After Earth far more than consensus — even going so far as to defend its basic stylistic makeup — it still isn’t very good; worse yet, it’s another sign of M. Night Shyamalan floundering in a system increasingly unfriendly to his way of handing things. But the character work is stronger than a Will Smith-shepherded summer tentpole has any right to be, frankly, so consider this ambivalent fan pleased at the news of his next outing: a “micro” family drama.
While it’s slim pickings on further details — excepting his promise of a story “about forgiveness, and about when you’ve done something wrong to a family member and you’re waiting for that to be healed” — we’ll take it. No one’s asking him to make a return to Praying with Anger or Wide Awake territory, but who wants to see these big-budget struggles to continue? In that regard, who thinks more of the same is just going to pick up speed?
Confronting that question would seem emblematic of all three developing shifts, these off-their-game mainstream players taking themselves down a different path at critical career junctures. Outside of some impressions of how a respective project “sounds,” it is, obviously, impossible to make qualitative assessments before a single frame has been composed — so, for everyone’s good, let’s not go ahead and declare this the right course of action just yet. After their recent runs, however? It’s a relief to spot seeds of a new tempo. Now, as for how people aren’t giving the fascinating Lone Ranger a fair shake…
What path do you think Verbinski should take next? Should he head the smaller-scale route?