Disney's fairy tale update starring Angelina Jolie is the highest-grossing original film of 2014
Disney's “Maleficent” has surpassed $700 million at the global box office, the studio said Tuesday.
It's Disney's 15th release ever to reach that threshold and the second of 2014, the first being the Marvel superhero sequel “Captain America: The Winter Soldier.”
It's also Angelina Jolie‘s highest-grossing live-action film of all time domestically ($229 million), internationally ($472 million) and globally ($700 million), as well as the highest-grossing original film of 2014 worldwide.
Released domestically on May 30, Maleficent opened at No. 1 with $69.4 million and has seen strong week-to-week holds. It's till in the top ten, eight weeks into its run.
Internationally, “Maleficent” has been bolstered by exceptional performances in China ($47.4 million), Mexico ($45.7 million), Russia ($37.5 million) and Brazil ($32.3 million), as well as in Japan ($32.7 million) where the film opened July 5 and has held the top spot for three weekends running.
Scarlett Johansson's 'Lucy,' Angelina Jolie's 'Maleficent' Lead Girl-Powered Blockbusters
With strong buzz and a star Scarlett Johansson riding high off of her blockbuster turn in Captain America: The Winter Soldier and her arthouse triumph in Under the Skin, it stands to reason that this weekend’s Lucy could be director Luc Besson’s biggest domestic hit, well, ever. If the tracking is to be believed, Universal’s (Comcast Corp.) Lucy could open with around $40 million this coming weekend, or about what it cost Eurocorp to produce. If it hits that mark or even something comparable ($25m would be no defeat here), it will be yet another sign that female-centric genre films like Shailene Woodley’s The Fault in Our Stars and Angelina Jolie’s Maleficent aren’t just playing on an equal playing field with the boy-centric blockbusters, but outright besting them.
There has been much talk this summer about the overall declining domestic box office, and much of that has been fueled by the fact that conventional boy-friendly blockbuster franchises haven’t been entirely pulling their weight. As I noted when discussing the PG-13 in terms of chasing the young moviegoing demographic, more somewhat older would-be moviegoers are actually going to the theaters than the conventional young kids. Moreover, in terms of that fabled young boy demographic that Hollywood is obsessed with, it’s starting to backfire as the industry is spending hundreds-of-millions on franchises and/or genre entries that appeal to a niche that makes up around 8% of total ticketbuyers.
Young boys are going to the movies less than young girls, and Hollywood is ignoring that fact at its peril. The conventional wisdom that girls will see a movie about a boy but boys won’t see a movie about a girl has not only been mostly debunked over the last several years but rendered mostly irrelevant. The lesson of The Twilight Saga was that a major blockbuster franchise didn’t even need male moviegoers to achieve top-tier blockbuster status. This pattern has been repeated over and over again by the $400 million+ domestic successes of The Hunger Games, Catching Fire, and Frozen. As Hollywood debates whether to panic over the year-to-year drop (I’m firmly in the “Don’t panic!” crowd), the films that are breaking out have genuine female appeal.
Sony is wracking its collective brain over what to do about the Amazing Spider-Man franchise which appealed to the stereotypical fanboys by dropping its “strong, independent, not just a damsel-in-distress” female lead down a clocktower head first as punishment for her can-do attitude. By the way, Amazing Spider-Man 2 played just 39% female compared to 46% for Spider-Man 3 in 2007. Even a film like Universal’s Neighbors has benefitted from strong female appeal. We can debate whether it was the appeal of seeing a shirtless/ripped Zac Efron or the presence of Rose Bryne as a full-blown leading character in an otherwise dude-centric comedy that pulled in female moviegoers, but Neighbors doesn’t get to $150m appealing to men only. As we should have known at least since the first Spider-Man, you don’t get to full-blown blockbuster success without relatively equal gender appeal. The films this summer that are breaking out are the ones that are either explcitely female-centric or at least somewhat female-friendly.
20 Century Fox‘s X-Men: Days of Future Past is no feminist treatiese (Xavier and Magneto’s rivalry boils down to “You stole my girl!”), but Jennifer Lawrence’s Mystique is a lead character with her own specific agenda in a franchise that has always been relatively gender-neutral. Angelina Jolie’s Maleficent was surprisingly leggy, parlaying a clear demand for a female-centric blockbuster into a run as one of the summer’s very biggest hits. It played a $69 million debut into a $228m-and-counting domestic total will exclipse X-Men: Days of Future Past domestically ($230m) and possibly globally (it’s at $697m and counting vs. $733m and fading) to become the year’s second-biggest global grosser behind (the exception that proves the rule) Transfomers: Age of Extinction. 20th Century Fox's (21s Century Fox Corp.) The Fault in Our Stars is arguably the most profitible major studio release of the year, as the $12m Shailene Woodley drama has earned $249m and counting worldwide.
It’s one thing to say “Oh, The Hunger Games proves that female action pictures can do well!” and leave it at that. But the story this year thus far is that female-centric pictures have flourished in a variety of genres. Divergent ($274 million on an $85m budget) was a hit young-adult action drama in a genre that badly needed a non-Hunger Games hit, The Other Woman ($193m on a $40m budget) was a win for women theoretically too old for Divergent or Frozen. The Fault in Our Stars was a genuine honest-to-goodness female-skewing character drama that is on the verge of $250m worldwide. Melissa McCarthy’s Tammy has now earned $71m on a $20m budget. Now Scarlett Johansson’s Lucy is poised to hopefully be the first female-centric superhero/super-powered action film to be a hit since… um… ever? We’ve had a handful of female-centric action films, but out-and-out superheroine adventures have been mostly extinct since Elecktra and Catwoman a decade ago.
It would be nice to eventually be able to talk about films like Lucy or The Fault in Our Stars without having to point out how unique they are in the mainstream studio landscape. But for the moment, when only 15% of major releases contain a full-blown female lead, when Emma Stone’s reward for breaking out in Easy A was being dropped on her head in Amazing Spider-Man 2 and playing the love interest to a man one year younger than the actress playing her mother (Magic in the Moonlight), and when absolutely no one thought to consider putting maybe one or two more female characters of note in the shockingly dude-centric Dawn of the Planet of the Apes and Godzilla, this stuff still matters. It still must be pointed out because even if Lucy is a hit and Dwayne Johnson’s (utterly lacking in buzz) Hercules is a miss this weekend, it will still be more likely to see more films like Hercules than Lucy. The numbers don’t lie about what can do well and what is doing well. It’s just a question of whether hard math will trump conventional wisdom.
this is a great number especially for a dissapointing summer like this. it is still making money and disney didn't even start its one dollar run yet.also melissa mccarthy is a A+ box office star. tammy doing good with absolutely terrible reviews. also tfios is probably one of the best investment fox has ever done
The Wrap + Forbes