Hollywood Should Be Panicking After Taylor Swift's Movie Takes Top Spot for 2nd Straight Week
So … is this a sign that Hollywood is in deep trouble? Or just a sign that Taylor Swift has the most maniacal (and that’s mostly a pejorative) fans on the face of the planet?
Honestly? It’s probably a little bit of both … but more of the former.
For the unaware, new NFL fan Taylor Swift released a “movie” in theaters on Oct. 13. Those quotes are there to denote that this film is largely just an at-home viewing of one of her concerts, specifically her wildly successful “Eras” tour.
It is not a traditional movie in any sense of the word.
That fact has not stopped the film from dominating the box office.
According to Deadline’s latest numbers, “Taylor Swift: Eras Tour” has raked in a hearty $131.1 million at the box office since releasing a little over a week ago.
That $131.1 million, when broken down however, should furrow the brows of Hollywood executives — because there’s a lot to unpack, and most of it isn’t good for Hollywood.
First and foremost, a Hollywood prestige piece was unable to knock “Eras Tour” off its perch, despite the prestige piece debuting and Swift’s film entering its second weekend.
Per Deadline, “Killers of the Flower Moon,” a lengthy period piece starring Leonardo DiCaprio and directed by the legendary Martin Scorsese, brought in $23 million in its debut weekend.
Swift’s concert film brought in over $31 million (there appears to be a dispute if it’s $31 million or $32 million at the box office).
Now, it’s certainly debatable if Scorsese still holds the cachet he held at the peak of his powers, and there’s nothing wrong with making $23 million in your opening weekend.
But it’s hard not to juxtapose “Killers,” a prestige period piece with star power up and down the credits, with “Eras,” a bubbly, pop music concert (that also features a lengthy run time of two hours and 49 minutes) that almost feels more like an add-on to a proper concert than a movie.
Perhaps even more concerning than the raw numbers and what they mean is the manner in which Swift produced this film.
As Fox Business points out, Swift completely skipped out on a rather sizable middle man: Hollywood studios.
Swift instead opted to work directly with a theater chain (AMC Theaters in this case), effectively eliminating whatever notable cut that studios typically take from a movie’s profits.
It’s a brilliant move by her (to her minimal credit, Swift may be a far-left loon, but she is an outstanding capitalist) and a rather worrisome one for studios.
Because if Swift is onto something here, with the way she simply cut out a studio to work directly with a distributor, that could drastically alter the way Hollywood operates.
For many people, a Hollywood reboot (as overwrought as reboots are in 2023) would actually be a rather significant improvement — even if Swift is the catalyst for it.
Now, of course, there is a chance that Hollywood executives aren’t giving this a passing thought because it’s Taylor Swift — arguably the most famous person, at the very least the most famous musician, in the world currently.
That’s the kind of clout and power that money can’t buy, so it’s fair to wonder if these unique trappings (the low $15 million budget for the movie, the cutting out of a Hollywood studio) are solely unique to Swift.
Indeed, not too many people are as popular or influential as Swift is in 2023.
In fact, Deadline noted that the “Eras Tour [became] the first concert film in history to make more than $100 million at the domestic box office and did so in just five days of showtimes.”
So this route of navigating Hollywood may not be possible for everyone, save for the richest and most famous.
But at the very least, it provides a blueprint of how to “win” in Hollywood without abiding by its rules.
That’s pretty neat (well, maybe not to Hollywood executive-types) — even if it did originate with the deeply polarizing Taylor Swift.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
