Does Red Sparrow’s disappointing box office spell doom for Jennifer Lawrence?

90th Annual Academy Awards - Arrivals

Jennifer Lawrence’s promotional tour for Red Sparrow happened just like every other promotional tour J-Law has done in the past seven years: she blankets the media (print and TV), gives great quotes that turn into instantly provocative headlines, creates a whirling dervish of controversy, buzz, pop-culture feminism and Cool Girl Realness, and then she just sits back and waits for the awards nominations to roll in. The problem is that her scheme hasn’t really been working the past few years. Passengers didn’t do that well at the box office, ‘mother!’ was a critically-panned bomb, and Red Sparrow’s box office has been “disappointing.”

To be clear, Red Sparrow is still chugging along, and perhaps ANY film released in the wake of Black Panther was going to be forgotten. Red Sparrow’s opening weekend was less than $17 million. Domestically, it’s made $31 million, and internationally it’s made over $50 million. Again, it’s not a “bomb.” But it’s not like people are crazy about this movie either, and it’s her third disappointment in a row. Which brings me to The Hollywood Reporter’s column “If Jennifer Lawrence Can’t Open A Movie, Who Can?” You can read the full piece here. This kind of column/thinkpiece is always written about whatever “movie star” has just had a film bomb. But this one feels… I don’t know, a little bit different. A passage:

And yet right now stars matter less than ever before. There isn’t a single star who seems able to keep pulling in a crowd. Robert Downey Jr. had his moment, but that was mainly because of his identification with Iron Man; and Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson’s riding a wave, but I’ve yet to be convinced he has the X factor that ensures long-term stardom.

I thought Lawrence was the real thing, until her box office began to show signs of continental drift. The news that she’s had her third flop in a row with Red Sparrow (following Passengers and mother!) was especially disheartening for admirers like myself. Partly, it’s a result of the movies she’s chosen. Even as a fan of the actress and Darren Aronofsky, I couldn’t even recommend mother! to my own mother; as for Passengers, perhaps I shouldn’t have watched it on a plane, but it made an already-long flight seem like it would never end.

There’s a chunk of Hollywood that might gloat at this bad news. But most of us should be concerned. If a star as bright and brilliant as Lawrence can’t sell tickets, who can?

Studios have increasingly turned to brands, rather than brand names, to the Star Wars and Marvel movies, rather than individual actors. They’ve come to favor a product over a personality. They’ve given up on the notion that film can be about real people, warts and all. And in doing so, they’ve turned their backs on their most important social role, the one thing that makes them more than mere corporations: their ability to teach us how to care.

Without developing character pieces, they won’t develop more stars. And without more stars, they’ll be forced back on machine-honed product, which might be fine entertainment but hardly nourishes the soul.

I hope this is only a phase, and not the death of stars altogether. Clearly, they’re an endangered species, though not one Hollywood cares much to preserve.

[From THR]

“Partly, it’s a result of the movies she’s chosen.” This is true… about ‘mother!’. If Jennifer really thought that film was going to be a massive box office success, then she’s an idiot. THR is right that the trend is going away from actual movie stars and moving towards franchises/brands that are not beholden to any single “movie star.” And that’s depressing. For J-Law specifically, I think there’s just a sense that her Cool Girl shtick has sort of worn out its welcome, you know? The promo for Red Sparrow was almost by the book at this point, from the Vanity Fair cover story to the two weeks of nonstop drinking and interviews and Realness. More and more, people are catching on to the fact that she’s just doing the same sh-t over and over. What pains me is that she actually CAN act. But she’s just bad at picking scripts, maybe.

World premiere of 'A Wrinkle In Time' - Arrivals

Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

262 Responses to “Does Red Sparrow’s disappointing box office spell doom for Jennifer Lawrence?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Alissa says:

    I don’t think she can actually act. Or rather, she acts like she’s still in her College drama Department. I think she’s not good enough to actually open a movie, unless she’s with a solid Ensemble or in a franchise.

    • LadyMTL says:

      Whereas I think she’s a really good actress but she choses underwhelming scripts (like Kaiser said). She was excellent in Silver Linings Playbook, for example. Unfortunately, aside from SLP, she’s really only had huge hits with the X-Men and the Hunger Games franchises, which makes it seem like she’s “lost it”, box-office wise.

      • ElleC says:

        YES! The reason these films bombed is because they sucked, not because she couldn’t open them – Passengers looked boring and turned out to have weird predatory vibes, mother! LOL the title alone tells you it’s trying too hard, and Red Sparrow had a shrug of a trailer. Pick better projects, JLaw, and you’ll get better box office.

      • PPP says:

        Yeah, it doesn’t help that she’s played so many roles that are so much older than her that it’s jarring when trying to evaluate the performance.

      • Katie says:

        Agreed, ELLEC. I think the HR think piece is a bit dramatic. Each of the three examples or terrible movies and don’t deserve our support just because JL is starring in them. No need to talk about how much the first two sucked. I will just say that the trailers for red Sparrow were unenticing, and I have no interest in seeing the movie because of that. I was actually surprised watching the trailers, that JL selected this movie. I like they were noticing is that she’s just bad at choosing films.

      • Liz Simpson says:

        We’re avid movie Goers of some fifty years standing and certainly know what we like,or don’t. We just saw Red Sparrow and actually thought it was quite good. Certainly she was in almost every scene, and really solid too. I think she’s been unfairly attacked. Granted ‘Mother’ was dreadful, and a mis-step. But not giving her films a chance is typical of critics and their way of building stars up just to pull them down if they don’t conform. She got quite a range and is always strong. If this was a male actor, there would not be the vitriol being displayed against Jennifer.

    • FishBeard says:

      I agree. I don’t think she’s a terrible actress, but she peaked super early, and most of the praise was coupled with her ingenuity. She strikes me a incredibly insecure as well, which is why she constantly needs to be loud draw attention to herself.

      • Lexie says:

        This. She burst onto the scene in Winter’s Bone (hot damn that was an incredible example of a great indie) and suddenly she was put in the Star Machine. It chewed her up and spit her out, so even though she’s been working for several years at this point, she doesn’t exactly have the life experience to evaluate pieces well. She’s probably going along with what her management suggests, and the suggestions are what they think will do well based on their wall-street type metrics.

    • barrett says:

      Pains me to say it, she’s a good actress. I sometimes think some parts were too old for her ( sliver lining, that one movie ab QVC and the mop) and some older actresses not so it girl hot should have played the part.
      W the the # me too movement I did not want to see a movie about a woman who uses her body as a weapon. I like more intelligent films w woman using their brains w less frontal nudity. We are evolving? Hopefully!

      • JG says:

        Agree with everything you wrote.

      • j says:

        totally. it was really bad timing to put out a prostitute spy movie.

      • Jenn says:

        YES!! The roles are too OLD for her! I “get” wanting a juicy, meaty lead role intended for a woman “of experience,” but at a certain point it’s like, Jen, you’re young, you’re hot, please just enjoy that with your characters.

        I think maybe it was supposed to be a shrewd decision, so the transition to “serious adult actor” from Hunger Games would be easier. She’s a terrific actor, but it would be nice to see her in a mainstream character study, of substance, that is age-appropriate. I guess that says more about Hollywood than about Jennifer Lawrence, though.

    • fes says:

      I think she’s a phenomenal actress; she was wonderful in Poker House (?) and Winter’s Bone, really dramatic roles which is all the more impressive bc she’s so bubbly in real life, it’s not like she’s playing her personality (like morose Kristen Stewart). I think she should do an Indie/Blockbuster/Indie/Blockbuster movie schedule, so she isn’t such in these big machine productions and can go back to more meaty roles.

      • Bianca says:

        I also loved her in The Burning Plain. She won Mastroianni award at Venice Film Festival in 2008 with her role andd it’s one of her best performances IMO.

      • Gretchen says:

        Just came here to say the same thing, she needs to go back to indie for a couple of films and work back the good regard she built with her earlier films.

      • valarmorghulis says:

        Inidie films cannot afford her $20 million paycheck. I highly doubt she’ll still be able to demand that much money for movie roles after these back to back flops.

      • Kelly says:

        I really liked Jennifer in The Burning Plain, and Charlize Theron – who typically leaves me cold – choked me up as the damaged adult version of Jen’s character.

    • citney says:

      Indie films is where JLaw shines, she’s had 3 or maybe even 4 flops in a row. I know Serena with Cooper wasn’t even released.

    • gentleorange says:

      She had a hit with X Men but it certainly wasn’t because of her. She was terrible as Mystique and it’s been the number one gripe about that Apocalypse.

      • Kelly says:

        I like her as young Mystique. She’s certainly above the T&A performance of Rebecca Romijn.

    • Beezers says:

      I agree, she’s not a good actress. I was shocked by how bad her performance in American Hustle was.

      I have gotten tired of her and her ReelGurl antics, and I know a lot of other people feel the same way.

  2. Clare says:

    Eh, I don’t want to begrudge a woman success, and certainly don’t want to wish her failure…but I do hope this little knock back leads to a reality check.

    I think she needs to reconsider her behavior a little, and relax with her habit of ‘punching downward’ (Lala Kent, that reporter she was a b**** to). Never know when the ladder will get pulled out from under you, y’know?

    • Suzanne says:

      Lala Kent isn’t a reporter…she’s a hostess on Vanderpump Rules.

    • Veronica says:

      Yup. JLaw punches down, like Trump does. She comes across as a bully. I know she has legions of fans, but I would never pay to see her in anything. I don’t like bullies.
      This may also be the natural result of her getting a wee bit older. She can’t really play the 18 year old anymore and there aren’t that many great roles for actresses out of their 20s.
      Maybe her break should include some stage roles. Really hone her craft…oh, and stop drinking. I think that may be part of this too.

    • citney says:

      I don’t want to hear how she holds her friends down and shaves their privates. Really, how gross can you get, this is not a teenager, but a woman who should have a script before being allowed to speak.

  3. Mia4s says:

    Sigh…this will drop her quote a bit…but “doomed”? Sorry but how many chances did Ryan Reynolds get before Deadpool? How about Chris Hemsworth (who can’t open a phone book let alone a movie but is about to be cast in Men in Black)? Hell Johnny Depp gets to be a bloated, box office bomb factory who apparently beat his wife but he’s the star of the Harry Potter franchise.

    But nope let’s use the woman as the example. 🙄

    • Becks says:

      Good points. I think she is probably one of the biggest legitimate female movie stars right now and its annoying to read that she is “doomed.” Lots of people have big hits and big misses.

    • Louise177 says:

      Probably the point. Women and minorities get 1 or 2 chances. But white males get 1 or 2 thousand chances. I think Jennifer will be fine because it seems like there haven’t been big movies. Most have been superhero, sequels, etc not original stories.

    • Carol Hill says:

      Meryl Streep had many films that went nowhere. JL is a beautiful white women. She will survive.

      • Tiffany says:

        Streep is still affordable. She does not command 20 a picture. Yes, the three time Oscar winning and record breaking nominee Meryl Streep is in the 5-6 a pic category.

        And as of late, her films are profitable.

    • Sunny says:

      I also don’t get it with Depp. His movies bombed one after another in a row. The only exception is POTC5, but it’s an established franchise. He also keeps playing only one character now, Jack Sparrow, whatever he does. He is stuck in it.

      • Veronica says:

        Life is not fair. I continually struggle with that fact, but it is what it is.

        White men have to work really, really hard to fail. Women and POC – we have to work really really hard to succeed. Having said that, JLaw is her own worst enemy in my view.

      • Harryg says:

        I really don’t get Depp, with his girl-lips! Then again there are a lot of stars I don’t get, like Gosling and no eye brow-Wahlberg. Or Pratt.

    • Frome says:

      Add to your list Josh Hartnett, Sam Worthington, Taylor Kitsch, all the Superman actors etc. None of the Chris can actually open a film despite some of them having more than one franchise. They’ll keep getting higher quotes until they stumble on a mega hit like Ryan Reynolds or Channing Tatum. White men can only fail upwards

      And why is Passengers pinned solely on Jlaw as if Chris Animal Abuser didn’t have more screentime. The story was about his character, not hers. Mother! was clearly never intended for a mainstream hit, that’s obvious.

      • JosieH says:

        She’s the one who got $20 million, that’s why it’s on her instead of Pratt. With the big paycheck comes big responsibility.

      • Sara says:

        Indeed re: the paycheck. I remember Jim Carrey getting backlash for the atrocity that was Cable Guy. He got $20 mil for that. No one was blaming Matthew Broderick for that failure.

      • Jellybean says:

        I was about to say that JosieH. A big fuss was made that she was being paid $20M and then that she was being paid more than Chris Pratt, even though he had the bigger role. Those things took the pressure of him and put it on her.

      • citney says:

        She has yet to open a film a successful film on her name alone. Once she can do that, you know she’s a real star. Few women in Hollywood have been able to this.

        Sandra Bullock, Angelina Jolie, and very few others are “name” actresses, meaning their name alone is all that’s needed for a film.

      • elle says:

        Pratt was definitely the reason I didn’t see Passengers (aside from the storyline, which held zero appeal). I can’t think of anyone who actually draws me to a movie, but plenty who drive me away.

      • Seren says:

        Actually i strongly disagree that none of the Chrises can open a movie without it being a franchise. Chris evens opened this movie called Gifted last year which costed just 7 million to make but grossed over 42 million at the B.O.
        No one can put the blame of The Passengers on Pratt because of JLaw’s 2o million pay check and how the media and even the marketing of that movie made a huge deal out of her 20 million which was more than the main lead got.

    • Indijersey says:

      Excellent point!!!

    • Misti says:

      I agree it’s unfair.
      But the difference is much has been made of JLaw’s $20 million paycheck and her being the biggest star of her generation. None of these guys got that I think?

    • Kelly says:

      Deadpool 2 reportedly isn’t doing well with testing audiences. Some people who were in the those audiences tweeted out their less than positive impressions and deleted them after being contacted by Fox. One I saw thought that the original director, Tim Miller, is very missed on the sequel.

      If that bombs, Ryan Reynolds will get a third chance and not get blamed, even though it seems like he had more involvement behind the scenes with this one than he did with the original.

      • Bridget says:

        Deadpool 1 made SO much money, and was so big, Deadpool 2 would have to be a humiliating flop a la Green Lantern for Reynolds to be thrown back into purgatory. Personally i’m not a huge fan and think it didn’t age well.

      • Frome says:

        I think Ryans plan is to drown us in Deadpool sequels. Even the films he has done since the first one have been unremarkable.

    • lucy2 says:

      Thank you.

      I saw Red Sparrow last weekend. It was OK at best, so I’m thinking she’s not picking the greatest films lately. On the other hand, she’s really mixing it up in terms of genre, so that’s at least interesting.
      The film so far as made 80+ million worldwide. Without her, I doubt it would have done that, so I think she’s still a draw, but if we compare her to her Hunger Games/Oscar run peak, of course she’s dipped down a bit, as pretty much every actor does. I don’t think she’s “doomed” at all.

      • AG-UK says:

        I too saw it as I see a lot of films and I like Edgerton but they had Z E R O chemistry it was ok but I knew it wasn’t going to be great going in plus it was at my £5.99 cinema.

      • Nives says:

        @lucy2
        I agree.
        I found that Jlaw had an amazing chemistry with Matthias Schoenaerts

      • lucy2 says:

        Edgerton doesn’t have much appeal for me for some reason, and I agree there wasn’t much chemistry. Must be nice to be an almost equal screen time costar and not get any of the blame for an under-performing film…

        Nives I agree her chemistry was more interesting with Matthias. Cast a Russian in this film, I kept noticing how he kind of looks like Putin!

      • minx says:

        I couldn’t get past Lawrence’s “moose and squirrel” accent, for those of us old enough to understand the reference 😂

      • Yeahright says:

        Edgerton gets none of the blame because he’s not a big star.
        He’s respected in Hollywood but a character actor.
        No one knows who he is.

    • Bridget says:

      There have been a ton of articles written for years that the age of the male movie star is done. In fact, Jennifer Lawrence is often held up as the example for how the Movie Star isn’t dead. She was basically the “last great hope” for the concept.

    • Milla says:

      Oh i so agree with this. I don’t think Lawrence is some miracle, but she’s way above Ryan. And few other males.

      She’s not my cup of tea. She’s overacting, but what hurts her career is her life. She cannot stop talking and most of it stupid. But she’s not a curse or poison, just someone who needs to choose roles and learn how to actually sound like a person, like Ryan Reynolds did, Emma Stone is another example.

    • Kelly says:

      I don’t think Johnny Depp was in the Harry Potter movies, but I agree with your greater point. White men are given endless opportunities in Hollywood. They also molest, rape, and physically abuse without consequence.

  4. Becks says:

    I think the promotions for her films are weird. I never know what the films are about, the trailers all look the same – lots of close ups of JLaw looking surprised or pensive – etc. So I think that plays a part – I’m not going to watch a movie “just” because she is in it because she does pick some weird roles that I might not enjoy.

    I also think she needs to go away for a bit and I feel bad saying that, lol. But she is always such a presence in Hollywood that sometimes it IS hard to tell when she is promoting a movie vs just being Jennifer Lawrence. I think if she kind of goes quiet for 6 months or a year and then comes back with a really excellent movie, it will “reboot” her career (“reboot” because I think she is doing just fine for Hollywood.) She needs to find a role where she is not “Jennifer Lawrence.” Hunger Games was a huge hit and I loved her as Katniss, but Katniss is the central figure. Jennifer Lawrence as JLAW doesn’t overwhelm the movies. I don’t know if that makes sense lol.

    Part of me thinks she needs to pull a Clooney – find a completely quirky and weird role like O Brother and then come back with a roar.

    • Tulip Garden says:

      O Brother was so very, very good!

    • Bug says:

      You are right. The promotion for Sparrow was awful. It seemed like there should have been some kick-ass fighting, but there wasn’t, so it was confusing. She is not an actress one associates with a thoughtful political/spy film. She should take the Kristen Stewart route. But I doubt she will.

  5. Sunny says:

    Maybe it’s what Hollywood wants? Replaceable actors and no real stars? If public is not really attached to specific actor/actress, but is more attached to franchises and movie brands in general, it will be easy to cast and recast roles, it will be easier not to listen or care for demands of actors or drop them from projects, it will be easier to negotiate payments for actors and not pay them that much money. It’ll also mean that studios can make more reboots, sequels, whatever, because actors won’t matter much.

    • QueenB says:

      For Hollywood the death of the movie star is amazing. Long term contracts with little pay (compared to how much the movies make) and then dump the actor the moment they gain some power.

    • Blaire Carter says:

      bingo

    • Bridget says:

      Yes and no. Hollywood LOVES a sure thing. That’s why they’re willing to pay for it, and center marketing around it. It’s why we see so many sequels/franchises/comic book movies. And it’s also reflected in the way Hollywood is making movies right now. They’re very few mid-level budget, adult movies with an original content. Yes, they are saving on massive salaries, but that has been a part of how they market anything that’s not a franchise.

    • BorderMollie says:

      This is the real answer. I can’t think of a single actor who opens a movie alone. The closest thing is actors whose fans are attached to them in favorite roles (i.e Tom as Loki) but those fans still aren’t following those faves to feature films. The film star era is dead.

    • misty says:

      Yep, it’s why most actors kind of all look the same, tall, blond hair, blue or green eyes, so you won’t notice when they get replaced with next year’s model

    • Liberty says:

      Yup.

  6. Svea says:

    In fairness, the movie just seemed like a retread of La Femme Nikita. Can’t writers come up with something new?

    • lucy2 says:

      It was based on a book, so it’s not so much the Hollywood writers as the book’s author, and the studio/producer who felt it needed to be made a film.

      • Harryg says:

        There are tons of new ideas, but the same always gets picked. Again and again and again. Thank god for Netflix though.

  7. Nicole says:

    It’s partly because JLaw as a person has worn out her welcome. Seriously her promo tours actively make me want to miss her movies.
    Second I’m not sure if she just cannot interpret the scripts she picks. She said she didn’t realize how creepy passengers was (paraphrasing here). And it’s like seriously? I read that script and picked that out immediately. Mother had no script when she signed on which is rarely good. And red sparrow was supposedly about empowerment except her character had little to no agency. Those messages are not great movies if they are critical themes and she seems to miss it every time.
    I think she can act but she can’t seem to know a good script from a bad one. Her best work is still pre-THG

    • ElleC says:

      She needs to hire someone to do her script picking for her- these were bad movies from the get go!

      • Nicole says:

        Exactly. I read Passengers script online and remembered thinking it would be good if they tweaked it into a psych thriller or removed the whole part about Jim waking her up. Of course they didnt but made it into a “romance” which is seriously disturbing. But it wasnt that hard to pick out which makes me think that she lack critical thinking skills, thinks these movies are good OR doesn’t read them.

    • Bridget says:

      Both she and Chris Pratt said that it was the best script they’d ever read.

      • Nicole says:

        right which ??? Makes no sense. Had they played it as a thriller I would agree. Also the last third of the movie was completely an afterthought

      • Bridget says:

        It makes me think that neither of them have read much.

    • Ankhel says:

      I readily admit i rarely watch her movies, but from what i understand she’s played abused women, and often sexualized ones too, in too many movies lately. She was creeped upon and manipulated in ‘Passengers’, abused in mother!, abused and raped in Red Sparrow. I don’t want that to be the norm, just like black audiences don’t want to see black actors always playing abused slaves and servants. JLaw is a big star, why not choose different projects?

    • Veronica says:

      Here is where her lack of a formal education, and study of the classics which she would have missed since she dropped out of school in middle school, may hurt her. She may be incapable of choosing a high quality script. Hunger Games, other franchises like that, are formulaic and not dependent on one actress to pull it off. Her recent choices – not so much.

      • lilophyllo says:

        Dropping out of school would definitely mean she had no instruction in higher-level reading comprehension skills. It may be difficult for her to analyze a script.

        Actually, I really liked her until I realized she was constantly putting on that Cool Girl act. Those kind of people are just so exhausting and uninspiring.

  8. Bridget says:

    I read that HR article, and I couldn’t get past the author talking about Lawrence’s portrayal of someone mentally ill in Silver Linings Playbook. That was Bradley Cooper’s character.

    As for the rest, these articles are written every so often, the big change is that usually it’s about the downfall of the male movie star. It’s cyclical.

    • Alessio says:

      Jennifer’s character in SLP is clinically depressed

    • Meggles says:

      It’s pretty explicit that both characters have a mental illness, and implied that she has bipolar. Remember the scene where JLaw’s character reels off the list of psych meds she’s been on?

      • Nives says:

        I don’t think Tiffany was bipolar. She’s more like a nymphomaniac and that is a consequence of the pain for the death of her husband. Maybe she was even depressed.

      • Bridget says:

        Implying something is the literal opposite of “explicit”.

        She reeled off meds, but i thought the movie heavily implied that it was to deal with her grief.

  9. Jayna says:

    But would anyone else have done better than her as far as box office and this movie? I don’t believe so. There are no huge box office draws for movies like this right now. It wasn’t her, but I don’t know anyone that was interested in this type of movie. Jennifer probably drew in a lot of her younger fan base. It just sounded like this movie had been done many times before in the promos.

    She used her nudity in every interview to try to sell this. I began to notice that. But it’s not flopping. As long as it’s deemed t make money for them and not lose money, she’s in okay shape. Look at Clooney’s bomb. Now, that’s a loss to the studio.

    • Tulip Garden says:

      Agree with your post. I will say that a similar themed film Atomic Blonde with Charlize was very good. It exceeded my expectations for that type of film. Good action, great clothes, strong woman, and a storyline not based on getting Charlize naked for every scene.

      • barrett says:

        *1,000

      • lightpurple says:

        Right? And the trailers for Red Sparrow made it seem like another, watered down Atomic Blonde, which made many say: “why do I need to see this again but with a different actress, when I just saw it?”

      • lucy2 says:

        I’ve seen both, and agree Atomic Blonde was WAAAY better. Red Sparrow definitely seemed a pale imitation at times. I was bummed that film didn’t do better, but I bet RS ends up with about the same income (with a higher budget).

        The movie Lucy is mentioned below – how that made so much money, I can’t ever understand. I thought that was a terrible film.

      • magnoliarose says:

        Atomic Blonde was good, and she produced it. But I think Charlize is a better actor and more versatile. She has more presence to me.
        I think a lot of that has to do with growing with her career and keeping it fresh. After Winter’s Bone JLaw never materialized like I thought she would.

      • Chaine says:

        I didn’t see either of them, but the trailer for Red Sparrow was pathetically unengaging. All I could tell from it was it was she was going to have a stupid fake accent and be naked/copulating throughout. It just seemed like a guy movie to me, not something that I as a thinking adult woman would find entertaining to sit through.

      • Jayce says:

        I watched both films twice. AB is an action film in the vain of John Wick and RS is more of a spy thriller. I don’t think you can compare them. Both leading ladies are talented actresses and they both did a pretty good job, except for their accents in these films.

    • Trix C says:

      Yeah, I haven’t seen the film, but from the reviews I read it seemed cliched, violent and misogynistic, plus I always side eye Hollywood’s idea of casting foreign (in this case Russian) characters, which is to cast a big name American actor but have them speak in a funny accent. It wasn’t a film I had any desire to see, irrespective of who was playing the lead character. Seems like a really odd career move by JLaw too, more like something a less established actor would do to get noticed, like Dakota Johnson in Fifty shades.

    • Misti says:

      I disagree.
      The thing is JLaw’s star power was supposed to be of such wattage that she was supposed to do numbers that blew the likes of Atomic Blonde out of the water on her brand alone.
      I mean I won’t lie, if Scar Jo could open a movie like Lucy to $40 million plus with zero promotion, I fully though JLaw could come close to that ( if not beat it). But it’s what it is.

    • JosieH says:

      “There are no huge box office draws for movies like this right now.”

      Which is why paying anyone $15 million to star in it is a bad investment.

    • Meggles says:

      Exactly. Atomic Blonde was one of the best movies I saw last year. I haven’t seen Red Sparrow but it sounds like Atomic Blonde minus the incredible fight scenes, the music (AB soundtrack is still in daily rotation on my phone), the genuinely strong female character who dresses appropriately for cold weather and for fighting, the cool 80s Berlin setting, the interesting and thought-provoking twist that the Wall fell irrespective of them, and Charlize Theron, but with added rape scenes.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        The soundtrack tho AB was amazing! It was like a character in the film lending so much to the texture and feel of the film. I said as much while watching it and that is unusual for me. Thanks for bringing that up because it was one more integral part of how to do these kind of films well.

  10. Tulip Garden says:

    I think that the question isn’t “who ” can open a movie but rather what can. The what is either franchises or, and here it gets complicated, very good films with very interesting stories and good casting! There are plenty of actors/actresses that I like but I am not paying for a film based on that. I want to be entertained, moved, something!
    Now days television just gives more of everything: story, character, acting, production value. There tons of movies available for free through Netflix, Amazon, etc. with big name stars that I am still not interested enough to watch.
    I like Lawrence and when she does something interesting , I’ll watch it. I haven’t seen Joy, Passengers, Mother, or this and I have zero plans to see any of them. I don’t know if it is my age or what but if I’ve got two hours, there is usually better ways to spend that time.

    • tracking says:

      I agree with all of this, Tulip.

    • Nicole says:

      Another good point. A movie with an excellent critique or character would bring the audience. TV has really surpassed movies in many many regards. Agreed

    • magnoliarose says:

      I think the same. Streaming owns my soul right now. I find something all the time that is interesting and keeps me watching.
      Right now my kids and I are watching the Blue Planet 2. I have more fun watching it than sitting through a trite movie in a theatre. Their reactions are part of the entertainment. lol

    • Alarmjaguar says:

      I think studios would be smart to invest in screenwriters- the actors are merely speaking lines, those lines and the stories have to be good.

    • misty says:

      Good point. I didn’t know any of the actors starring in Get Out, I went to see it based on the summary of the plot, the good reviews, and to see what Jordan Peele after key & peele. I just don’t think people go see things because of the actors in it, just because something is well cast doesn’t automatically make it good.

    • Veronica says:

      Agreed. There are so many really excellent original movies, shows and actors and actresses on tv and Netflix and Amazon Prime that I am not moved to go out, spent $30 on a movie and also at least 3 hours of my life. It is just not appealing anymore.

  11. lobstah says:

    I don’t think it’s a coincidence that as soon as Harvey Weinstein disappears, her movies are in the toilet.

    • ElleC says:

      I don’t think that’s fair – Joy, Passengers, mother! all happened before the Weinstein takedown and they were all snoozer projects.

    • lucy2 says:

      ?
      I think the only film of hers he produced was Silver Linings Playbook.

    • jenna says:

      Don’t listen to the troll. The alt-right has been enacting a smear campaign against her for months that insists Weinstein was behind all her Oscar campaigns and even had a hand in The Hunger Games. It’s unsurprisingly delusional.

      • lobstah says:

        No need to name call, I’m not a troll. I’m just saying she was one of his golden girls and I don’t think it’s a coincidence that she’s failing to bring in $$$ and he’s not there to swoop in and give her another Oscar bait movie.

  12. smcollins says:

    I think she’s a good actress. Not a great one (yet), but she definitely has talent and a real screen presence. I think with age and maturity, and further honing her craft, she’ll find herself remaining on the short-list of in-demand actresses. I do really enjoy her in The Hunger Games and X-Men movies, but they had built-in audiences that all but guaranteed their success. I think she needs to return to smaller, quieter films like Winter’s Bone where she seems to shine brightest.

    • Lexter says:

      I like her and liked Red Sparrow but haaaaated her cringe worthy Mystique in Xmen. I’ll hear the painful tooth brushing ‘mutant and proud’ line for eternity as I rot in hell.

  13. Talie says:

    You know, I really liked Red Sparrow…it was like a film that would’ve come out in the 90s. A bit darker, no real action, and focused more on the drama.

    As far as her box office record, it was most dependent on franchise films. The Oscar movies she did weren’t supposed to be $100 mil movies, that just happened due to buzz.

  14. Busyann says:

    I liked her in Winters Bone, the first hunger games, and Silver Linings Playbook, but everything in between and after has felt….off. I don’t know how to describe it, but there’s a certain amount of boredom she brings to her roles and, as I movie watcher, I pick up on it and that makes me less likely to want to watch a movie she herself seems disinterested in.

    • tracking says:

      She’s been churning out one movie after another and at a certain point, the characters don’t seem differentiated. She needs to take a break, allow people to miss her, and come back fresh.

    • Elaine says:

      Yes @BusyAnn, I felt that way too! Especially in the most recent X-Men and in Passengers. Bor-ring! I think her heart is with indie films. She has an edgy, dark sensibility that brought a subversive quality to her work in X-Men. Her and Fassbender were able to bring a depth to that comic book outing.

      And the Hunger games was about a gameshow where children kill each other for the privilege of not starving and entertaining the rich! Talk about dark.

      JLaw just needs to find the right balance in a script/story that will let her freak flag fly.

    • minx says:

      She was very touching in Winter’s Bone; I remember watching it and thinking she was going places. SLP though was just a hammy, over-the-top role that didn’t require any subtlety,

      • Jellybean says:

        I love subtle performances and for me Lawrence is a bit over the top. I hated her and Cooper in American Hustle and wish it had focused on the rest of the cast.

  15. QueenB says:

    How many people still can open a movie by themselvse? Di Caprio and who? Exactly. This isnt the end. A more balanced career will help her long term this crazy hype couldnt last long and isnt helping anyone.
    She absolutely profited from her “I talk to the press like I talk to my drunk girlfriends” image but that gets tiring very quickly because she is in the news all day everyday when she is promoting.

    I think she is problematic and annoying but she can act. If she lets this settle down a bit and makes some good smaller movies she will have a great career.

  16. wheneight says:

    I think the biggest answers is reviews. People don’t want to spend a the money, make the commitment (most theaters near me require reservations now), and leave home for a 5/10 movie. Why would you? There’s a billion 5/10 movies I can watch on Netflix right now.

    How about studios stop trying to get us to the theater with big names and start making better movies?

    • MellyMel says:

      This! People don’t go to the movies like they used to because of the cost and the quality of the films themselves. If I’m gonna pay $12+ and have a seat reserved (required for all the theaters in my area), I want to do that for a movie that actually looks interesting…I don’t care what big name star is in it really.

    • Sunny says:

      See what happened with much hyped Wrinkle in Time. Bad reviews, poor audience score. People do not really want to see it.

  17. Dirk says:

    Wasn’t she mentally ill too? I thought SLP was about two mentally ill, extremely good looking people who… uh, dance at the end. Yeah, that one sucked too. Jen can do Jen onscreen but she ain’t got a lot of notes in her range, and her accent in Red Sparrow sounds well dodgy. She’ll be fine, tho

    • minx says:

      LOL at your description of SLP, because that’s basically what it was.

    • Naddie says:

      Thaaaaanks for saying this. I hate this movie with all of me. Her character was basically the sulky side of her public persona. When she won the Oscar for that crap I finally understood why some actors like Joaquim Phoenix couldn’t care less about it.

  18. Suzanne says:

    Hope not for her sake…but hope so for ours!

  19. RBC says:

    I may be slammed for this ,but I don’t think it is Jennifer Lawrence can or can’t act/carry a film on her own. It is more her overexposure that may turn off many people from going to see her movies. A person sees her antics or hear some comment she made, and many people will think” Do I really want to spent money to go see this person on the big screen?”
    Look at Tom Cruise, he still gets paid big money but his personal life( jumping couches,etc) but as far as making big money at the box office, those days are behind him.

  20. wendywoo says:

    Honestly, I don’t want to see these films:

    A woman gets cheated out of her life by a selfish man but then forgives him and procreates. (Passengers)
    A woman is psychologically tortured by her husband and his friends. (mother!)
    A woman is forced into effectively just bi-lingual sex-work. (Red Sparrow).

    It’s the stories. She needs to find roles in stories where she’s not at the mercy of (fucked up) men. We’ve seen/lived those films for generations… Boring… NEXT.

    • Charmed says:

      +1! I think she’s a fine actress if only she’d pick better movies. If she’s not readings cripts she likes maybe she should start producing roles for herself, a la Reese Witherspoon and Margot Robbie.

      • Veronica says:

        Does JLaw have the education, smarts and wherewithal to pick movies or, even more demanding, create movies and roles for herself? At some point, I think we may need to understand that her lack of a formal education may impact the roles she chooses. Did she ever read any classics?? She left school in the middle of middle school – maybe you do one Steinbeck in middle school? I bet she has no exposure to truly great writers, really well thought out plots with fleshed out characters.
        I am thinking her early successes were luck and now we see what happens when someone who is not educated at all makes choices of what stories would touch people enough to go see them.

    • Darla says:

      Exactly! I really like her and would definitely go see her films, but I have not seen the three you named above for those exact reasons. Not interested.

    • i, pet goat 2 says:

      That’s exactly it for me.

  21. Kitty Barthes says:

    Jennifer can’t have it both ways.

    She can’t do Indy movies with a huge pay cheque.

    Red Sparrow would have been fine with a smaller budget and if it came out in November.

  22. Lala says:

    What I don’t understand is that Jennifer moved into the “A” list BASED on franchises! Before that…she made her mark in indie films…along the lines of “Mother”….It was the “Hunger Game” franchise…THEN the “X-Men” franchise that moved her up…Her career didn’t mirror someone like Angela who never had the wonderful cushion of franchises to move her career…so I’m confused at the slant THR article…

  23. Suki says:

    Women tend to peak young in film. Rachel McAdams took a break and although she does work solidly, she doesn’t have the career she SHOULD have had (arguably she doesn’t want that kind of career.) JLAW knows that she has to put the work in now. IMO, taking a break would be a bad idea in that regard. Women don’t always come back from breaks. Although Hollywood likes her, so they may always welcome her back.

  24. HK9 says:

    I saw the movie and I had a hard time with the violence. I’m a movie nerd and I’ve seen all sorts of things, maybe I’m getting soft in my old age but for me it was a bit much and it didn’t seem to advance the plot in a meaningful way so it felt gratuitous and exploitative.

  25. magnoliarose says:

    I think her offscreen persona overshadowed her onscreen performances. She is so extra that she is more entertaining in a way that is more compelling than anything she can put onscreen. Like Chrissy Teigen was for a time, it becomes overwhelming.

    I don’t think she managed her career as well as she could have. Getting Academy Awards at a young age and all the nominations were too much. I don’t think they were all deserved. It leads to expectations she can’t deliver though not many people can. Outside of Winter’s Bone, the other awards weren’t the best performance in those years and didn’t deserve to be nominated. Joy was terrible, and American Hustle was good but not great enough for an Oscar nomination. It seemed too forced, and I didn’t quite buy that it should have been her. I feel that way about Meryl nowadays. I don’t buy she deserves to be nominated every single year.

    She hasn’t built a body of work good enough that a movie with her name means it will be above average and worth my time to arrange my life to sit in a theatre.
    Some names I will become more interested in, and they aren’t huge names. I know they are consistently good and can elevate a film from good to much better. They make risky choices, and I have enjoyed more of their performances than most other actors.
    Some time off and a new direction would do her some good. Making writers important again might make new stars catch on, but it has to be more than promotion and hype.

    • Mabs A'Mabbin says:

      I was going to say the same thing but probably not as nice lol. Her acting does always seem forced, and I never forget she’s acting. When scripts for movies become more important than the marketing machine, movies might collectively get better. We’re handed such garbage to pay for these days, I’m doing what so many are doing. I’m staying home to stream some superb TV. There are so many excellent series to delve into, it’s shocking theaters can stay in business. And that’s what Hollywood needs to remember. They exist for our entertainment and if they want to fill seats, they must realize we’re not idiots and continue to feed us regurgitated crap. They need intelligent writing. And they need actors who aren’t glossy versions of humans. I want actors who place more importance on acting over visual poses for that mouth-agaped “money shot.” lol

      • magnoliarose says:

        Me too! Let’s see a movie together! lol
        I like characters that stay with me after the movie. I like stories and dialog spoken or unspoken. I want quality and fresh perspectives. TV is offering diversity in age, race, locations, language and on and on.
        I just finished Hotel Beau Sejour a few days ago. I like these one season series and don’t mind the subtitles. I can watch when everyone else is sleeping in the cozy comfort of home.
        Also, when it is on TV, I can accept more flaws if the overall show or film holds my attention.

        And like you I am tired of the gloss and the artificial people. Europe and other countries do that better.

      • Mabs A'Mabbin says:

        They do. When I’m watching Happy Valley or Line of Duty or even Broadchurch, The Fall or Luther with their yummy protagonists, I feel sucked into the story. The acting surpasses appearances. And when entire scenes can exist without dialog, it’s golden. Australian and Canadian shows can rock it too as can we. I can’t say enough about The Killing, one of my favs, The Americans, Fargo, Mindhunter, Better Call Saul, ect. So little time lol.

      • magnoliarose says:

        Aack The Killing was riveting. I couldn’t stop watching. Happy Valley was good too.
        I can’t watch quickly, but it makes the times I can binge watch much more delicious.
        The acting draws me in because the actors look like their characters would look so then the story becomes everything.

  26. Carol says:

    What difference does it make if she IS doomed – shes already make millions and is set for life.

    • Pandy says:

      Right? Lol. Hard to cry tears for her. Really though, I think most movies nowadays aren’t worth the cost of making them and I think the public isn’t “hero-worshipping” “stars” like they used to. And that’s a good think IMHO.

      • Naddie says:

        I think exactly like you. We don’t see famous people as gods anymore. That “mystery and glamour” era is gone, and I say good ridance for it.

  27. Reef says:

    Is 80 million considered bad for a spy thriller in March? It sounds like she’s doing fine.

    • Misti says:

      For a $70 million budget – not counting all the international promo? It’s not good.

    • Kitty Barthes says:

      Plus marketing
      Plus her salary and others
      Plus 50% the movie theatre take
      Plus the cost of making the movie

      The movie will barely break even

      • Nives says:

        Salaries are included in the $69 million budget. And the movie wasn’t filmed in US so it takes less for break.

      • Jellybean says:

        Work on taking 2.5 x production budget to break even, more if most of the box office comes from overseas or a long run since the percentage of the theater returns is less.

    • Sara says:

      I recently read a Gizmodo article that a movie making 2.5 times its budget is considered breaking even.

  28. Rumi says:

    I never watch a movie due to the star, it’s always about the story. These A list stars most of them for me don’t perform that well. Its the character actors who bring it.
    I’ve seen such great story telling from foreign films. Why doesn’t Hollywood recognize that people want to see diversity and authenticity not showmanship. For me Jennifer is average but ladies like Lupita, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Amy Adams, Charlize Theron, Juliane Moore, Viola Davis, Margot Robbie, Ruth Negga, Octavia Spencer, Penelope Cruz (Can’t think of anymore at the top of my head) never dissapoint.

    • magnoliarose says:

      I am with you. The actresses I like the most bring it every time no matter what. It takes time to get there.

    • Slowsnow says:

      Completely agree. I always love actors for acting and not for their promo tours. compared to other actresses, JLaw is a little above average with the advantage of having charisma (sometimes, other times she seems bored).
      By the way, no one around me is really aware of promo tours to be honest. I don’t think they can make or break an actor. I do think JLAw hasn’t been very wise in her role picking.

    • lucy2 says:

      You listed some of my favorites, and I will seek out a film that Amy, Charlize, or Viola starred in, because of them – and because I know they usually pick very, very good films.

      For all its self congratulatory ways, Hollywood seems to be a very risk-adverse business. If something works, they rush to make 10 more versions of it, often ignoring the quality or magic of the first. If something different does well, it’s an outlier, a fluke. Hence the “shock” every time a film about a woman or person of color does well.
      And the flip side – if a Chris Hemsworth movie does poorly, there’s a million excuses. If a woman or POC film flops, it’s because “audiences don’t want to see that”.

  29. Merritt says:

    She needs to pick better projects. Her last few films didn’t interest people. IMO her best film was Winter’s Bone, she should have won her Oscar for that film instead of the awful Silver Linings Playbook.

  30. Sunny says:

    Ok, but what female actress can actually open movies now on her own? Any suggestions?

    • Andrea1 says:

      Angelina Jolie when she decides to come back to acting

      • lucy2 says:

        She did well with Maleficent and a few action movies, but had a lot of under-performing dramas in between.

        I don’t know if there are any actors, men or women, who guarantee a big movie nowadays. Maybe the Rock?

      • Tulip Garden says:

        Only if she comes back with Malificent or another Disney type franchise. While I think she can be good in a particular film, like most, it has to be that film to be a blockbuster. I think The Tourist and By The Sea were her last two not cartoon or cartoon adjacent films. I think one did okay, The Tourist.
        I could be wrong about all of this! If I am , I’m sure there are people that know her filmography backwards and forwards.

      • teacakes says:

        Yeah she had Wanted, Salt (seriously if I want to watch a compromised agent in Russia kind of movie, this is what I’d go for, not Red Sparrow), Mr and Mrs Smith….none of those were franchises.

        Almost all her action/franchise films have done well, it’s the Oscar bait dramas and The Tourist that flopped.

      • Tulip Garden says:

        I really enjoyed Mr. And Mrs. Smith. I rewatch it when it is on. I also liked Wanted although it wasn’t a great movie and I only watched because MCAVOY!! Salt was like, worthy of a free watch for me but not a re-watch.
        Jolie was the only good part of Malificent to me. As a whole, I didn’t like the film but she was good in her role. The story and every other character was super forgettable.
        I don’t know how her film career will progress post Malificent. It should be interesting to see if she transitions well from the action pics to more ordinary life fare. It is difficult to do as Julia Roberts and others can attest.

      • LetItGooo says:

        Hi @teacakes

        The Tourist was panned, but it didn’t flop, it made over 300 million at the box office worldwide.
        .
        People misunderstand what we mean when we talk about ‘opening a film,’ and what that means. It doesn’t mean that someone has the power to ‘open’ a wide release in over 2000 theaters and an indie that’s in 13 theaters and have them both make over 100 million. It’s a given that a small artsy film with a subject matter that doesn’t have wide appeal won’t break the bank. So no one expected a small indie like ‘A Mighty Heart,’ about journalists decapitated by terrorists to make what ‘Wanted,’ made. Or ‘By the Sea,’ that released in 7 theaters to do what ‘Salt,’ did. Angelina has been one of the few actors who can ‘open’ wide releasing pics (that are original scripts, not superhero/comic book franchises) and have them make bank.

        J-Law however, with her ‘Red Sparrow,’ and other wide releasing flops, hasn’t been successful – ‘Mother,’ was an indie w/a weird subject matter – it doesn’t have to break the bank necessarily- but when she comes out with big films that aren’t franchises (gain, franchises don’t count)– films like a horror flick that releases wide, or a big budget wide release like ‘Passengers,’ or ‘Red Sparrow,’ – yea, they’re supposed to make bank. That let’s the studios know they have a star, an opener. That’s what studios expect.

        In that respect, J-Law certainly hasn’t performed as well as an Angelina or a Sandra, or even a Kristen Stewart who when she stepped out from her Twilight franchise she opened big with Snow White.

    • Merritt says:

      Given the industry’s treatment of women that is a complicated question. Less than half of speaking roles go to women and few women driven films get the greenlight.

    • Slowsnow says:

      I think that’s a false question TBH. It’s an equation between actor, script and zeitgeist. Ex: There is Something about Mary (Cameron Diaz); Hunger Games (our JLaw); Lucy (Scarlett Johansson); Amélie Poulain (Audrey Tatou) etc…

      • Tulip Garden says:

        I agree with this. There does need to be more than a “star”. The entire industry has just changed. I do think Dicaprio is one of the few remaining box office guarantees especially impressive with no franchises. I favor him because he usually picks real quality projects. I kind of feel like I can trust his judgement, if I have any interest in the subject matter to start with. I mean I was disappointed in the J. Hoover film which I was interested I but I blame Eastwood for the direction of that film and I wasn’t dazzled by The Revenant but, in general, I like the things he chooses. Thinking of it, I came name many of his films that I genuinely enjoy and would watch again.

  31. Cate says:

    I enjoyed Red Sparrow. It wasn’t Oscar worthy or anything but it was stylish and entertaining. She even did a decent Russian accent in the movie. I too am frustrated with all the franchises and super heroes. But I also don’t need everything to be epic and high brow Oscar material, I just want to be entertained.

    • Tulip Garden says:

      I actually think most agree with you. We don’t always want the high brow, the art, or, God forbid, the lessons. We do want quality though. Zany comedy, teen angst, action flick: all can be done well and be entertaining with no pretension towards awards or critical accolades. It is just about making entertainment well with an eye to pleasing the audience that that particular film is made for, imo.

    • Seren says:

      That’s strange if you like Red Sparrow while you’re frustrated with franchise and Superhero movies. People saw lot of similarities between Black Widow ( Marvel Comics) and Red Sparrow right from the trailer that the director of RS had to come forward and explain why they are not the same. Both Russian Spies with dark tortured past, ballerinas and products of secret Russian spy schools of cold-war era. So when Marvel Studios end up making their own Black Widow movie are you going to end up hating it just because it’s a franchise superhero esque movie?

  32. Patty says:

    That article confused me. When has she ever been able to open a movie?? Her biggest movies where a well known franchise (X-Men) and an adaptation of an insanely popular YA Series (Hunger Games).

    SLP was a hit but I think that had more to do with it being a fairly good movie and word of mouth kept it going; that being said, I don’t know anyone who saw that movie specifically for JLaw.

  33. Sussy says:

    Queen of Hollywood

  34. Veronica says:

    I think it means she needs to pick better projects. Red Sparrow’s reviews weren’t that great, and she was up against major blockbusters – Black Panther (still reigning supreme) and A Wrinkle in Time (family friendly). It was never going to do well with those odds if it didn’t bring quality to the table.

  35. Ninks says:

    The counterpoint is that these are three particularly bad movies, that only did as well as they did because of JLaw. Had another actress been in any of those movies, the reviews would have been the same, at least for passengers and mother, and I’m pretty sure the box office would have been worse. Mother would not have gotten the attention or wide release it did without her star power, and the criticisms of it were not directed at her acting. The problem isn’t her pulling power, it’s the movies she’s picking.

  36. Sunny says:

    Also if we are talking about death of a star. How can anybody be a star nowdays with such exposure? Twitter, instagram, those constant interviews which are streamed live in the web, videos on youtube. You can easily find dozens of photos of those actors everywhere cause everybody now has a camera in their phone and you don’t even need to be paparazzi to take pics of those celebrities. The mystery that used to make stars larger than life is long gone. And I doubt you can be considered a star without some mystery about you.

  37. Serena says:

    I think people are just tired of her so-called ‘realness’.

  38. browniecakes says:

    This is Julia Roberts’ career. Hits followed by flops. Mystic Pizza Steel, Magnolias, Pretty Woman – all hits, one right after another. Followed by 4 flops: Flatliners, Sleeping with the Enemy, Dying Young and Hook. She’s still around.

    • Amide says:

      Difference is Julia movies did big numbers at the box office. (I think bigger than JLaw for their time anyway). She was a box office queen before becoming an Oscar winner.

  39. Mj says:

    I don’t think it will effect her at all. I don’t really like her. I find her obnoxious, ignorant, rude, so overrated, and because she is a pretty white blonde she gets away with a lot, but she seems very well liked in Hollywood. She isn’t going anywhere.

  40. tw says:

    I kind of like her, not the press tour Jennifer, but the actress. That being said, she’s not in the same league as someone like Charlize Theron, who picks interesting films and kills it every time. Yes she’s had one or two missteps, but Atomic Blonde, anyone?! And now she going in a totally different direction with Gringo . Charlize isn’t overexposed and she’s believable in a variety of roles. I don’t think Jennifer Lawrence can pull that off.

    • Tulip Garden says:

      I have become somewhat of a Charlize fan girl! I am so looking forward to Tully. Charlize just does the damn work. She doesn’t court the press or tabloids. She doesn’t try to be an everywoman. She does the work, promotes the work, and goes away til next time. She has really won me over, ironically, by not trying to win me over!

      • Nives says:

        Charlize just had the Gringo flop last week. I hope that Tully is better.I like her except when she was in a relationship with Penn because I can’t stand it LOL

      • Tulip Garden says:

        @Nives,
        Oh I wasn’t suggesting Charlize hasn’t had and won’t have more flops. I think that it is kind of inevitable for all actors/actresses. I just have come to enjoy Charlize more than many other actresses both professionally and personally. For instance, she produced and started in the film adaptation of the novel by Gillian Flynn, I think, and I enjoyed the book but found the movie poorly put together and Charlize tragically miscast. That’s what I mean. No one is going to be successful all the time. In general, though, I like her decisions, her chances, and her performances. Charlize seems to be her authentic self which, while not loveable, is relatable and likeable even. She is the type of woman that doesn’t apologize for being, well, her.
        Oh, I think her dating history can be horrid and may be again! I don’t hold it against her. For me, it’s like with Leo as long as your hurting no one just do what makes you happy. I think Penn was a particular poor choice as was Seth McFarlane. I just don’t want to judge women on their partners. We don’t really do that to male movie stars. We just kind off shrug so I’m doing the same for Charlize. Now if she does something harmful or hooks up long-term with an idiot my opinion may change. Mostly, I just think she’s dating around and I say, good for her!

      • Nives says:

        @Tulip Garden
        I agree with you even on Dark Place: good book but bad movie. And yes, everyone has flops in their careers.
        Charlize is a a strong woman and a great actress and now that she isn’t with Penn anymore I’m happier

      • magnoliarose says:

        You have hit it on the head.
        She won’t always hit, but there are so many good ones that the ones that don’t take don’t stop her from having a solid reputation for quality.
        I prefer actors to work and show up. I don’t need to know anything else. I don’t need pap strolling and IG thirst. I don’t need PR relationships and fake relationships or manufactured drama.
        It is fun to gossip, but I find the ones who make the columns the most usually don’t have an impressive body of work. Make me want to see the work to see them.
        I like Charlize a lot. I don’t care if she’s not warm and fuzzy. I don’t need her to be.
        Sean Penn ugh but its over. TG.

  41. Lucy says:

    Nah. She’ll be fine.

  42. Iknowwhatboyslike says:

    I work too hard for my money to go to the movies just on the name of an actor. Not even for Denzel. The story has to be compelling and worth the money I’d have to spend for my ticket and food. All in all, I just think there hasn’t been good movies coming out of Hollywood and if the movie has a good storyline, the acting is subpar. I’m just tired of the same old faces and names. The truth of the matter is that Hollywood has absolutely no imagination and allow their racism and colorism to guide them into the same old trope. Jennifer Lawrence in Red Sparrow is stale. But how refreshing would it have been if the character was of another ethnicity? If the marketing is good and story kicks butt, I think it could have done well with a little change in the script. I’m just tired of the same faces!

  43. Bianca says:

    Red Sparrow is already at $84,478,291 worldwide (box office mojo). It was filmed in Europe, so what matters is the overseas result.
    In 12 days it almost surpassed all the Atomic Blonde’s gross. It isn’t bad for a hard R-rated movie, with violence,sex and mixed reviews. Probably without Jlaw this movie wouldn’t have been done.

    • JosieH says:

      With a $69 million production budget, plus the tens of millions spent on advertising, it’ll need to make a minimum of $200 million to even come close to breaking even. It’s not merely about what a movie makes. John Carter made $284 million. Nobody calls that thing a hit.

    • magnoliarose says:

      Atomic Blonde was produced by Charlize and had an 18 million dollar budget. Which why they should stop with the bloated movies. It is a recipe for failure outside of franchises, books and superheroes.

  44. Petitehirondelle says:

    DiCaprio is the only one who seems to have big sucess just with his name… he has never flop no? i was stunned that even Gosling with BR has flopped. All my girl friends share « hey girl » on facebook and instagram but don’t watch his films…

    • Nives says:

      The Beach was a flop.

    • Sunny says:

      Was his J. Edgar considered successful?

      • Bianca says:

        Surely it was a flop regarding awards. I can see Di Caprio signing for that movie thinking of the oscar instead he wasn’t even nominated

    • lucy2 says:

      Someone mentioned Leo upthread too, so I was looking at his filmography. He doesn’t work that frequently anymore, and I think a good portion of his recent success is being very selective and working with big name directors. He always seems to be aiming for Oscar bait.

    • Veronica says:

      He also tends to work with highly regarded directors who are household names. In other words, not only does he have his pick of the best by merit of his position in Hollywood (and being white and being male), he also has a lot of big names helping him push those movies into success.

  45. Nives says:

    mother! is hated or loved but wasn’t a critically-panned bomb. 75 on metacritic and 69% on rotten tomatoes and it ended in many top ten best list at the end of 2017

  46. Other Renee says:

    There’s always a backlash after a lot of praise. The things about someone that are endearing in a rising star are annoying once they’re at the top. Then begins the process of criticism and tearing them down.

    I liked her in SLP and Joy but now she’s so insufferable and full of herself that I have no desire to go out and spend money see her films. Maybe if it was a film I absolutely had to see … but none of her last films were appealing to that extent.

    • Bianca says:

      People are stupid if they like to criticize people (especially women) as soon as they succeed (I refer to people in general not to you).
      It seems as if women are not allowed to succeed

      • A says:

        That’s the thing though. JLaw’s recent run of movies haven’t been successful. She’s a successful actress acting in unsuccessful films. I don’t think it’s out of place to question why that’s happening. That’s not misogyny. Discrediting JLaw’s earlier successes and pinning it down to male directors or her co-stars–that’s misogyny. Her success is her own and she has lots of it.

      • Bianca says:

        @A
        Yes, it’s true but I was talking about those people who like to criticize a woman as soon as she’s successful and not for other reasons. I read a lot of them and I don’t just refer to showbiz but also to things of everyday life. This is sexist.

  47. Bianca says:

    That THR article is one of the most misogynistic and sexist things I have ever read.

  48. A says:

    If JLaw can’t open a movie, who can?

    Well, if Black Panther is any indication, then it’s Chadwick Boseman, Lupita Nyong’o, Danai Gurira and Michael B. Jordan. Or given Star Wars’ recent success, Daisy Ridley, John Boyega, Oscar Isaac and Adam Driver (helpfully added by nostalgia and Carrie Fisher and Mark Hamill and Harrison Ford ofc).

    I don’t think it’s bad that we’re moving away from movie stars. It’s good. It stands to reason that the things we always took for granted would someday not be the case. TV has had enormous success, and I also wonder if TV casts (many of which are successful ensembles) have a role in diminishing movies led be the star power of one, maybe two people at most.

    Studios should look at the movies that have been successful in the past few years and figure out what makes them tick. I know the impulse is to say “diverse casting” and yes that’s true, but the best movies are that and more. Mad Max: Fury Road, for instance, was a revelation because of the unique story and how well it was told. Thor: Ragnarok stepped away from Marvel taking itself so dang seriously and shook it up enough that it reminded everyone that superhero movies should be fun to watch, not desaturated drags (looking at you Justice League). Same thing for Get Out. These were all stories and movies that were told and made well, with an intention and purpose beyond just “making the big bucks.” The age of expecting a movie with a mediocre plot being carried on sheer star power a la Tom Cruise and Top Gun are gone. Let’s stop beating that dead horse and move on.

    • Bianca says:

      Black Panther is Marvel, a comic book movie. And Star Wars is a franchise. We’re talking about movies that aren’t marvel or franchise.
      For example, Chris Hemsworth can open Thor but his other movies are flops.
      Lupita isn’t the leading in Black Panther and Queen of Katwe (her movie that wasn’t a comic book) did only $10 million Worldwide of a $15million budget, a big flop.
      Same with Oscar Isaac, John Boyega and many others.
      We aren’t talk about Marvel movies that would open huge regardless of who was the cast.
      Comic books and franchise aren’t the same of a “normal” movies.

      • A says:

        Okay, but you’re missing the point. None of those people are movie stars–that’s exactly the thing. They can’t open movies on their own, they work best in ensemble casts. I’m not saying that Black Panther succeeded solely on Lupita Nyong’o’s shoulders, in the same way X-Men: First Class wasn’t successful solely because of JLaw. That’s exactly the thing–star power no longer motivates how successful a movie is. Also, there are franchises and Marvel movies that have done poorly at the box office–Justice League and DC’s movies in general have tanked because of poor scripts and direction. Wonder Woman didn’t (with hardly a movie star at the helm).

        Movie stars aren’t a draw. Good, solid story telling is. Movies with a strong script, a stellar ensemble cast, and a director committed to a particular vision is. There used to be a time when someone like JLaw theoretically could shoulder blockbusters and have the sort of opening that’s comparable to something like a middling Marvel movie. But people simply don’t find movie stars themselves compelling enough to go to the movies for. That’s not a reflection of JLaw’s talent or her success as much as it is a reflection that tastes have just changed. I’m not interested in spending two hours at a theatre watching a movie that I don’t like just for JLaw or anyone for that matter. Many other people aren’t either.

        If JLaw wants her movies to be received well at the box office, she should find better scripts and better directors to work with. Her offerings in the last few outings have simply been stale. Expecting mediocre movies to do well just because it as JLaw in it isn’t going to work anymore. Again–not a reflection of her, or her talent. Just a reflection of how people have changed their movie-going habits.

      • Bianca says:

        @A
        I’m sorry I misunderstood you because we’re saying the same thing LOL

      • A says:

        @Bianca, haha, don’t worry. I was worried i was misreading something too, but I’m glad we’re on the same page. (:

    • JosieH says:

      Ryan Reynolds once said, regarding Green Lantern, Warner Bros. cared more about the posters than the script. That same studio reportedly gave David Ayer just six weeks to write Suicide Squad. Both movies ended up being terrible.

      Studios definitely need to invest more time in developing stories. Movie stars can’t save them anymore.

    • magnoliarose says:

      Absolutely.
      I think it might work out better in the end. Maybe then a person can become a star based on the quality of their work and not on hype and PR. It opens the door for women and minorities. For everyone with talent and a good story as opposed to someone in the industry forcing them on the public and made into stars. If it is based on merit and with smaller budgets, they can take more risks and still see a profit.
      Quality and variety in all areas of filmmaking will bring interest. Churning out tripe won’t. Social media means word of mouth means more than ever, and if it is panned all over the place I stay home. I can catch it later. I don’t even enjoy screenings much anymore.

  49. smee says:

    Flops haven’t spelled doom for Ben, Matt or George…….I could go on…….so why should she be held to a higher standard of success?

    She needs to pick better projects (not so many blockbusters) and she should probably hurry up. Women only get X amount of time before her “last eff-able day” on screen.

    • bikki says:

      but let’s be honest, is anyone really excited about Ben, Matt, or George anymore? I, for one, am not.

  50. Lolalulu says:

    Is she incapable of doing comedy? There are so many incredible comedic actresses/writers/producers that would leap at the chance to work with her. Or how about a nice rom com. Not every movie has to be oscar bait. Expand her profile, work with some strong female heavy hitters (maybe even some poc, shocker!) Develop some range.

    • Sara says:

      I’m not sure she can. See her turn hosting SNL. Even she said in an interview she knew she wasn’t funny.

      • A says:

        She did a good job hosting Jimmy Kimmel’s show. I don’t even care about her strange obsession with the Kardashians. We all have our stuff, she’s never had any pretense about that type of thing, and it gave a lot of material for the writers to work with.

        If she’s doing comedy, she should stay far far away from Amy Schumer and Lena Dunham. That is all.

  51. marianne says:

    To be fair, I think long gone are the days where all you needed was a “movie star” to sell a movie. I dont know anyone who has watched a movie purely because Jennifer Lawrence starred in it. Or Tom Cruise or Angelina Jolie etc. They may be contributing factors, but in reality people go and see movies because the trailer looked good. Or it got good reviews. Or because its based off a pre-existing property you like. So I dont think Red Sparrow’s success should ride on Jennifer Lawrence’s shoulders. I think if you replaced her with a different actress, it probably would have performed similarly.

    • Tulip Garden says:

      Agree!

    • LetItGooo says:

      Sorry @marianne ‘Red Sparrow,’ ‘Passengers,’ and ‘Mother,’ even that horror flick Lawrence did, were HER star vehicles. So yes, ‘success should have ridden’ on JLAW’S shoulders. That’s how it works.

      Also, we kind of know how Red Sparrow would have done if you replaced Jlaw with with a different actress…because Angelina made a similarly themed original Russian spy film a blockbuster, see ‘Salt.’

      Maybe people have Russian fatigue.

      • magnoliarose says:

        Could be. I admit if Angelina were the star I would have made an effort. I miss her in action. She never had the career I wanted for her. Lol But I also think she is more fulfilled in life now.

  52. Jbapista says:

    Lawrence has tried to have her cake and eat it – to get box office hits while starring in edgy films like Mother. (Which, by the way, wasn’t a ‘critical flop’: just look at RT, most critics liked it, some raved it, a small minority really disliked it.) However, her choice of films hasn’t really worked out. I suspect her days as a movie star are numbered. However, she’s a massively talented actress. (People in denial about this are just letting their issues with her persona override their critical judgment.) So, career-wise, she’ll be fine – directors will keep hiring her, just not for $20 million. In other words, she’ll drop down to a Charlize Theron level – which is a fine place to be.

    • Slowsnow says:

      I really don’t understand why JLaw is a “massively talented” actress. If she doesn’t over-emote its seems she’s sulking or bored. She is also young so her acting may evolve. But there are a lot of great actors out there who are much more subtle and can convey a wide range of emotions that she can’t, at least not yet. She was perfect for Hunger Games because it’s all about the gore, the plot, the danger, the game – therefore, just a lot of close shots of Katniss, scared-surprised-ready to fight-fighting-tired-enraged. All simple emotions. In Winters Bone she was the go getter with a lot of nerve – close to her personality. I don’t see anything that blows my mind like so many actors out there who are truly fantastic but not on the same level of celebrity.
      I agree with you with the comparison to Charlize who can only do a certain kind of role where she is cranky, dangerous, badass, etc. I am worried about Tully to be honest but I hope she’ll blow my mind. They’re De Niro actors, i.e. people who are good but on a certain kind of role. JLaw needs to understand her range and work on it. I also agree on the celebrity thing: it was a bit of luck with a lot of good white blonde girl looks and a huge box office. It might not happen to her again in a lot of time or ever.

    • Lilly says:

      @Jbapista
      I agree. She can do subtle (Winter’s Bone, The Burning Plain, The Poker House), but also over the top and comedy (SLP, American Hustle). She also went against type in mother (one of her best performances IMO). She’s still at the beginning of her career even if she’s already so famous and big and this is why I think she has a lot of potential for improvement. In my opinion she showed only 10% of what she can do so far.So yes, she’s a great actress.

  53. sean says:

    The real problem with Red Sparrow was the timing. Black Panther sucked every box office dollar for the month. It also filled the theaters and parking lots and drove away Sparrow’s audience of older movie goers. Had they released it 4 weeks earlier, it would have been a moderate hit. It is doing decent foreign business.

  54. tearose11 says:

    If only.

  55. Tallia says:

    I liked Red Sparrow.

  56. Blonde555 says:

    Her really bad wigs in Red Sparrow ruined the movie for me.

  57. Jag says:

    What I saw of the promo for the movie, she looked like she was playing dress up. She has a gorgeous body and can be pretty, but she’s not sexy and her movements were robotic.

    Also, it doesn’t help that when I see her image, all I can think about is how she talks about farting and burping and being gross. That isn’t sexy, and it colors everything that I see her do.

    It doesn’t help that in all of the roles that I’ve seen her play, she’s been very wooden. Like Scarlett J. wooden. That kind of performance won’t get people in the theaters. Perhaps I’m just biased because I don’t think that she’s a good actress. I think that she’d be fun to hang out with, but her portrayals of everything since The Hunger Games’ first movie have been bad, imo.

    As for who can open a movie these days? Chris Hemsworth’s Thor with Hiddleston’s Loki – and the entire cast of the Black Panther – that’s who. lol

  58. Avery says:

    It wasn’t just timing with Black Panther. I have no doubt it would not have done much better any other dates. The movie is just another La Femme Nakita. It is nothing we havent seen before and better. JL is not the seductress she may think she is in her head. She is in no way believable in this role. It’s not just picking better scripts but roles that would fit her core talent better.

  59. Delon says:

    OOOOOO…Jackie Blue

  60. Lilith says:

    I laughed all the way through the movie trailer when I first saw it.. she can’t do a convincing Russian accent to save her life.

  61. Jussie says:

    The problem is the budget these films have had.

    Joy made 100 million worldwide, which would be fantastic for that type of film had the studio not inexplicably given David O Russell twice his usual budget.

    Passengers got a full blockbuster budget, despite little action for the vast majority of the runtime. It didn’t need that. 70 million would have done it, and with that it’s an unqualified success.

    Mother! actually did well for an inaccessible, super arty, R rated horror. Had it cost 10-15 million instead of 30 it would have been fine.

    Red Sparrow is easily going to hit 100 million and top the recent success of Atomic Blonde, but it has twice the budget. There’s nothing in the film (including JLaws salary), that couldn’t have been done with 40 million.

  62. liriel says:

    To be honest we’ll see how it goes. Hunger games were meant to be hits, just like 50 shades of grey (sorry for comparison). So I agree with those who say she never had a movie that was a huge box office hit that she carried alone. I think about Julia Robert’s career, sudden success of pretty woman and making movies with Richard Gere. Fans wanted to see them, no matter the roles. It was never this way with Law, she was a media and critic darling, too many nominations. Now she tried different kind of movies, mother, RS, yet no matter what she chooses she disappoints. I think that the next 3 years would be the most difficult for her. Will she get good scripts? Will she make good choices? It’s kind of sad that we only have Leo as almost bullet-proof and franchise-free star. I prefer star quality over franchise.

  63. Patty says:

    Good Julia Roberts comparison. After Pretty Woman people were willing to pay money watch her in just about anything. Even if they weren’t critical darlings that string of movies she did right before and after Pretty Woman, made a lot of people a lot of money.

  64. isabelle says:

    The trailer for the movie was awful, her Russian accent was awful, think the real turn off wasn’t Jennifer herself but the movie itself.

  65. No Doubtful says:

    She’s talented and I like her personality, but she keeps picking bad movies. Silver Linings Playbook and the Hunger Games series are the only movies of hers that I’ve liked. Go mainstream Jennifer.

  66. themummy says:

    I think she’s a phenomenal actress. She’s very talented. However, I think what this comes down to with her is that her “neato, cool chick” schtick has put her way into overexposure territory, which is saying a lot since it only takes a few interviews for people to feel both annoyed with her and JL exhaustion. She should select her scripts more carefully, act more grown up, and maybe quiet down a bit. I think the idea that her career is “doomed” is ridiculous, but if she wants to maintain her value and make up some lost ground, she needs to re-evaluate how she presents herself.

  67. perplexed says:

    I felt Passengers could have done well if she had starred opposite Chris Hemsworth instead of Chris Pratt. I had no desire to see that movie when I saw that Pratt was her leading man. I guess I wasn’t excited to see him make out with someone.

  68. MoAnne says:

    I agree that she seems dated now. She’s a total cool girl–championing the epic d-bags of Hollywood. I remember that she supported David O’Russell–calling him her “soulmate”–while her co-star, Amy Adams, talked about O’Russell abusing her. Jennifer came off as self-interested, and not concerned about what happened to Adams. Her public persona is one of a frat girl who acts like the dudes. Now, that we’re living in the age of Trump and the metoo movement, people don’t find this behavior cute anymore. But, she’s trying to change it around by talking about supporting women, and taking a year off to be an “activist.” Okay…we’ll see how that goes.

  69. Riley says:

    She’s the Taylor Swift of film.

  70. perplexed says:

    Her career will be fine. Scarlett Johansson, Natalie Portman and others have all had box-office failures and yet their talents are touted constantly. They might have had some private troubles at times in their careers but overall they’re seen as successes. I really can’t see her career going south unless she suddenly develops an interest in being GOOP-lite or she shoplifts.

    A lot of this stuff comes down to perception, it seems. Julia Roberts had some big flops, but she’s always been seen as a success.

    We may be living in the era of the end-of-the-movie-star, but a lot of these successful actors still have comfortable lives. Journalists seem more worried but us no longer having movie stars (why?) than than the rest of us. There will always be entertainment, both commercial and critical, on different platforms.

  71. Bing says:

    I bet if she tried some romcoms those would be her box office hits. Then she can afford to do the smaller drama roles she wants.

  72. Bev says:

    Just because she made the Hunger Games series a success does not mean she has continuing talent. Many people in showbiz end up tombe one hit wonders.

    • bikki says:

      true. also hunger games was a success already, before it got made into a movie. if anything the book series catapulted Jen into stardom, similarly to what Twilight did to Rob P and Kristen S

  73. Sara says:

    I think her best roles were Winter’s Bone and American Hustle. She did well in Silver Linings Playbook and the Hunger Games. The difference is those were all really good movies with strong casts. She also did a lot of just ok movies. Like X-men and some horror movies I don’t even remember the name of.

    This Red Sparrow movie looks so trite. How many times have we done the Double Agent With a Heart of Gold? I think Angelia Jolie already played that out with Salt. Then there was Atomic Blonde. It’s just… give it a rest already. Mother! was a terrible, terrible choice too. That movie was so pretentious and just awful. She’s making bad choices. She’s not invincible! Just because she’s Hollywood’s golden child doesn’t mean everything she touches is magically going to sell.

    Honestly I think right now the BEST roles seem to be going to Nicole Kidman. She did Big Little Lies, Top of the Lake and some other great Indie films. She’s had a great little resurgence in the last couple years and I’ve come to love seeing her on screen.

    Jen just needs a good script.

    • magnoliarose says:

      Nicole Kidman is another solid actress who chooses well and always delivers. I like that she diversifies. She fixed her face to look more natural again so I enjoy her again.

  74. Katori says:

    Down with JLaw!! She’s annoying. I have always disliked her since she admitted to being an a**hole to fans. Not saying she should embrace strangers on the street but you could tell that she knew she was famous and decided to let everyone know she knew it. I hate it when celebrities go “I’m so famous people mob me.” Although, her body was doll-like and eerily perfect in that early lingerie scene in the hotel room. She looked like a 19 year old and I think that’s an amazing feat. She should keep making bombs. That makes me very happy to read.

  75. bikki says:

    “And in doing so, they’ve turned their backs on their most important social role, the one thing that makes them more than mere corporations: their ability to teach us how to care.”
    eh that’s bollocks, and you know it, Hollywood Reporter. movies without huge “movies stars” are still being made and some of them are wonderful & sell well. and re: marvel & dc: black panther may be a derivative of a superhero universe, but it still had a really good message to whomever watched it.

    I simply think many, especially younger generations, are just not keen on blindly giving loyalty to an actress/actor, when not everything he/she is in is worthy of admiration. especially in the age of the internet when we can search for the exact thing we want to watch at any given time.

  76. Shannon says:

    Does anyone really go see movies anymore based simply on the actor(s) who are in them? I know I don’t. There are a few actors I avoid (Tom Cruise, Johnny Depp for example) but there’s not one single actor I could name that I would just *have* to see a movie he or she was in. I pretty much base it on whether or not it looks like something I’d enjoy. So regardless of my feelings on JLaw (which are non-existent, I have no strong opinion on her) I think “doomed” is a little strong. I’d guess she’s just picking scripts that don’t appeal to a lot of people. I’m seriously asking – does anyone decide not to see a movie just because the lead actor seems kind of annoying in interviews or may or may not drink too much? Because that just seems kind of silly. I think the age of someone opening a movie on name alone has been over for a while now; there’s too many other options for entertainment. It’s not like back in the days of only three tv stations and, “OH, the new Harrison Ford (or whoever) movie is out” – now it’s more like, “Meh. I’ll see that movie later maybe, but I’m gonna Netflix and chill tonight.” Only kids’ movies and big things like Black Panther can get me to actually buy a ticket (kids movies because of, ya know, my kid lol).

  77. WMGDtoo says:

    She can’t carry a film on her own. Hunger Games is not the defining thing. She has had 5 movies in a row that were not BO successes. This is not a new thing. It happens to men too. Most of the men in those Super Hero films don’t have good BO success outside of them.

  78. KatInChicago says:

    I don’t think it is Jennifer Lawrence. As a moviegoer, I have no interest in seeing SexyThongAssassin part 6bajillion reboot remake prequel sequel again.
    It doesn’t matter who the star is.
    I see it in ads, I see it on TV, I have seen it before. It isn’t empowering, it is patronizing to be told undressed woman + violence= confidence.
    Nope.
    It just means paunchy old men jerking off fantasies on a big screen. And I’m not interested in paying for that. Not sorry.