‘Fireproof’ Earns Twice As Much As ‘Religulous’
Oct 27, 2008 by Vic HoltremanHow has Fireproof managed to make TWICE as much money as Religulous at the box office?
I went and saw Fireproof this weekend, the low budget Christian film starring Kirk Cameron. It cost all of $500,000 to produce thanks to tons of volunteer efforts and community donations. As far as I know Cameron refused a paycheck for appearing in the film.
It was written, produced and directed by Alex Kendrick, whose previous two films Facing the Giants and Flywheel (neither which I’ve seen) are both also Christian-centric films.
I haven’t seen Bill Maher’s Religulous, and honestly, have no desire to do so – at least for a few months. All this electioneering has my blood pressure spiking already and I don’t need to see Maher’s smarmy approach to belittling religion to put me over the top. Maybe once the election dust has settled and it’s no longer saturating the web I’ll feel up to it.
Expectedly, Religulous has been getting much better reviews than Fireproof. I can’t say I’m surprised due to a number of reasons – I’m sure the production values on Maher’s film are far higher than on Kendrick’s, and the Fireproof cast was populated by members of the local church… no professional actors outside of Kirk Cameron. And of course the subject matter and message of the film doomed it to critical panning overall, regardless – although I was surprised to see at least moderate recommendations from a couple of critics at the NY Times and Variety which looked past the obvious at the emotional impact of the film.
Bill Maher conducts an interview in Religulous
What I found to be completely unexpected is the fact that Fireproof has earned twice as much at the box office as Religulous.
Both opening weekend box office numbers and total to date are as close to two-to-one as you can get. On their respective opening weekends (one week apart), the barely advertised Fireproof earned $6.8 million while the highly advertised Religulous earned only $3.4 million. As of the date of this post the numbers are $23.6MM vs $10.6MM.
And let’s not even get into the profit margin side of things. Fireproof had an ROI of $46 for every dollar spent while Religulous earned $4 for every dollar (probably less, if marketing is considered).
Granted, Fireproof opened on 60% more screens, but over ensuing weekends its numbers have dropped by a far lower margin due to word of mouth than Religulous.
A friend of mine who runs a movie news site asked (incredulously) how in the heck a movie like Fireproof could have a $6 million opening weekend. I would add to that how the heck did it manage to trounce Bill Maher’s anti-religion movie?
Sure, I’ve heard the “call to action” reasoning – churches exhorting their members to go out and see the film and support it. I can tell you that I heard no such announcement or mention at the church I attend. I didn’t even know about it until after it had already opened. Of course I’m not saying that didn’t happen, just that it didn’t happen at my church.
Kirk Cameron rescues a child in Fireproof
What I do find interesting is that the movie has held up so well – this must be attributed to good word of mouth. Believe me when I tell you I was not looking forward to watching it, but my wife and I and another couple made a day of it, driving up to Park City. I was expecting a cheesy movie along the lines of the Left Behind movies – and while the acting was far from great (with a few surprising exceptions), I found the film to be much better put together than I expected.
And personally, I found it extremely moving and that surprised me big time.
Now if someone shows up to see this film who is a hard core athiest or an anti-religion/anti-Christian person, they’re going to hate it and its heavy slathering of “the message” starting at about the half way point. However for those who can set that aside, you’ll find a very emotionally intense film about the attempt of an estranged husband trying desperately to keep his marriage together.
I cannot speak to the content of Religulous – I’m sure it was quite enjoyable for fans of Bill Maher. But I’ll tell you what’s fascinating about all this to me… I spend a LOT of time online, and it gives one a skewed view of the population. I would say that people who don’t believe in God and are vocal about it probably outnumber believers by at least 5 to 1 online. There’s nothing scientific about that number, it’s just my impression from blogs and social networking sites that I frequent.
I say it’s skewed, because if that translated to “the real world” Religulous should have beat the crap out of Fireproof at the box office. By a very wide margin – especially considering TV commercials, trailers, etc.
But that didn’t happen.
I know that spending a lot of time online can cause us to think that this little “bubble” represents everyone out there, so maybe we should step back once and a while and remember that it doesn’t.
To some that will be disconcerting (and they’ll no doubt deny it), but to others it’s a comforting thought.
Around the web:
Loading ...
Ok well i admit i haven’t seen Religulous yet but i will on dvd someday.
@Ken
If I understand your point, are you saying Maher’s film may not be anti-religion but he may be using extremism as an excuse to sell his film?
heh Look, i’m of the firm belief that you can criticize religions without actually insulting the actual faith. Every religion hold some form of extremism or another. If you tend to think that extremism is a positive thing that should be enforced in all religions, then that’s your opinion. But i find extremism should be discouraged as it gives all manner of faith a bad name. So Maher, making a documentary trying to expose the bad apples from the bag so to speak, to me is really just helping people of faith to identify the problems so they can stop it before it goes too far.
I’ve seen Maher go on all the talk shows (Daily Show, Letterman, Jay Leno, etc) and he keeps trying very hard to explain to everyone that Religulous isn’t about hating religion at all. It’s about how extremist-organizations are manipulating religious people.
If you watch Maher’s show, you’ll notice how he never insults the beliefs and faith of any guest on his show. He questions them and criticize them, sure. But never insults them. You question what you need to understand. This is not a means to insult, it’s human to do so.
I’m not making any statements about whether or not extremism is a good thing or not. But judging from it being called “extreme” I would assume that would make it a negative thing.
Anyway, my point is that Maher is setting up a straw man. Instead of directly insulting religions in general, he picks an argument that’s easier to win and knocks that one out of the park instead. So instead of simply coming out and saying that he thinks that only dumb people are religious, he picks on extreme cases of seemingly irrational people and then associating those responses to their religious faith.
He knows that if he conducted the same interview with people who are simply religious, like any of you who may be religious, that person will simply give a completely rational response.
No fun in that now is there?
Upon being accused of having an oral fixation, Freud said; Sometimes a cigar is just cigar!
@jc
The only thing I’ve seen from Facing the Giants is that football crawl scene on youtube. I didn’t know what it was from at the time but it blew me away as inspirational for ANYONE (it had nothing to do with religion).
Vic
Oh, it just occurred to me… all this talk of “you can’t compare these two movies?” Over the last few weeks no one had an issue comparing the box office of “Beverly Hills Chihuahua” to “Body of Lies” or any other film it was up against, lol.
Vic
The online presence of atheists vs christians is merely because the former have a larger internet presence. The latter are alot more common in the real world.
I think a lot of the same issues exist. Agnostics/Atheists make up a small amount of this population. A lot of people do not want to put their beliefs under a microscope and be forced to confront some of the discrepancies between logic and religion.
I think Maher’s movie was not going to do well for a few reasons. Pre-conceived notions of Bill Maher, and those were not proven wrong. He’s liberal. He’s loud. He’s often obnoxious to many. Hard to bring people to the theater to see a movie you don’t want to see strictly because a person is so divisive.
Second, I think the issue at hand, unlike Michael Moore films is incredibly personal. A believer is a believer, regardless of what extent. Many people are aware of the problems religion creates when viewed under a highly skeptical logical framework. People, rightly or wrongly, do not need to have someone they already detest force the issue onto them.
I think those two issues alone make it highly unlikely Maher’s movie was going to do well. I, being an agnostic, enjoyed the secular arguments presented in Maher’s movie. His personality is grating. It was too long in that regard, and I still think his picture of religion was pretty narrow. Judaism did not receive the same level of scrutiny as Protestant Christianity or Radical Islam.
Regardless, Kirk Cameron is just as obnoxious, and because I’ve garnered the aspect of the movie I’m not sure I can sit through another hour and a half of someone who has such an awful personality like I did with Maher’s :\
I haven’t seen Fireproof, but I did see Religulous, and was disappointed.
Not surprising that a scrappy melodrama with a hopeful message would outperform a depressing documentary hosted by a bitter wise guy.
It seems to me that the amount of effort made in putting forth and then fervently defending this point of view vastly outweighs the amount of effort such a pithy observation deserves.
“Vic” clearly is upset about something else. McCain losing perhaps? Maybe some more films by religious nutjobs will help you feel better.
Fireproof was one of the best movies I had ever seen. Very emotional.
Jif
http://www.Privacy-Center.net
Don’t know how Fireproof grossed so much at the box office???
Because the fundamental Christian society that founded the very nation we call home is finally coming back out of the “Lets be quiet and not interfere with society” closet and making a stand against the rising tide of hate, fear, and sin in America.
Look at our nation 200 years ago. There were no shootings in our schools, there wasn’t a nightly homicide to tell about in the news, people didn’t cuss each other out, and our government was prosperous and pure in it’s intentions of protecting freedom. What WAS present 200 years ago was a society of people who loved each other, were kind, forgiving, and did not waver on the fact that there is a clear definition of what is wrong and what is right, and they didn’t turn their eyes or fill their pocketbooks while wrongful injustices were being done in our nation.
I too was “forced’ to watch it by my wife, and went with another couple. Both my wifes friends husband and me were making wise cracks all night. We both ended up enjoying the movie actually and were very surprised that it was much better than expected.
I’ve never heard of Fireproof, but Religulous was flawless. Perhaps the best movie I’ve seen all year, and I’ve seen a lot of movies this year.
Ok, Vic…
Fireproof is an entertainment film, “FICTION”.
Religulous is a documentary “NONFICTION”.
Documentaries NEVER make as much box office clearing as entertainment films. Its a known movie industry standard.
Only recently have documentaries approached the level of box office clearing as entertainment films. This is a specious argument.
Just so you have your facts straight EVERYONE.
Fireproof @ boxofficemojo (they keep track of EVERYTHING)
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=fireproof.htm
Religulous @ @ boxofficemojo
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=religulous.htm
And as an added bonus: For documentary proof. Jesus Camp was a documentary for atheists about Christians… it barely grossed $900k (domestic) what does that say about your theories?
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=jesuscamp.htm
The truth is Christians ARE a larger pool of potential movie goers, but its more than that. Christians are ALL part of a “built-in” network, that meets… um… once a week. You don’t think word of mouth is an effective marketing campaign anymore?
Honestly, a lot of atheists/agnostics knew about Religulous, and from my meanderings online… they all know or have the inkling Larry Charles will most likely release it free online, eventually. Yes, I just stereotyped my own peeps, online tech-savvy atheists/agnostics, as cheapskates. I still love ‘em though!
I thought Religulous was hilarious, but it wasn’t supposed to be a comedy. It was supposed to make you think about religion in this country, and to ask questions.
Then again, I’m a militant atheist who knows science is the candle in the dark, not primitive mysticism. Maybe that taints my views.
@Johnathan Tate
Please review history. This country was founded by a group of men, many of whom despised religion, especially Christianity.
As such, by a similar line of reasoning, if we went BACK to having more people in power who despise religion (esp. Christianity), we’ll have less school shootings.
Logic was never the religious person’s strong point, though.
You are compairing a anti-religious documentary with a christian themed action-y film. One had a much wider distribution, etc.
The author is obviously trying to say religious movies do much better than non-religious ones. While this may be true (all evidence to the contrary) these two movies weren’t the best examples.
Generally I think people will see good movies, even if they have a pro or anti religious pretext. You can point to the Narnia and Golden Compass, but they didn’t do poorly because of message, they did poorly because the movies weren’t any good.
Generally I think a better indicator is gross/screens. I think by that metric Fireproof might still have beat Religulous. Generally people like entertainment more than polemics. Religulous preaches to the converted, Fireproof is entertaining, and doesn’t try TOO hard to shoehorn the message in.
It’s all about entertainment folks, get off your high horses and enjoy the movie.
Also, you may want to note that Beverly Hills Chihuahua earn way more than either film.
What does this mean? Is the belief system of the Chihuahua superior the others due higher box office gross?
No.
They are different films with different audiences.
If you really want make comparisons then wouldn’t it be Expelled vs Religulous?
Expelled: Opening Weekend: $2,970,848 in 1,052 theaters
Religulous: Opening Weekend: $3,409,643 in 502 theaters
@Bill
I’m not upset about anything – in fact I’m pleased. I was just surprised is all. When you spend a lot of time online you start think that that folks with your point of view vastly outnumber people with mine.
Until you step outside your front door and actually go interact with people.
Have a nice day.
Vic
All that talk is there because it is right. Chihuahua and Body of lies are entertainment, just like Fireproof. Religulous is a documentary. It’s much easier to find an audience for entertainment (drama/comedy/etc) than it is for a documentary. The former are movies, the latter isn’t. Taking a large room of people it’s easy to say a large proportion wouldn’t mind watching/hearing a story versus watching interviews for 2 hours.
In any case I haven’t, nor do I intend to see either movie. Bill Maher’s is probably just the same old entry level discussion on religion like you get here or in all comment threads.
Reading some of the comments here…maybe Maher is building a straw man, like I said I haven’t seen it, but I could easily see it as being something along the lines of ‘look, extremism of any sort is silly, and it’s up to the normally quiet people who aren’t extremists but might be part of the greater whole to start speaking up and making it known that they are reasonable and far more normal than they are being made out to be in the media because extremists get all the attention. It’s just like how I always tell people that it is beyond silly to blame religion for all bad things, but it’s agnostics/atheists like that that get all the attention. The reason the internet is amazing is that the normals can talk to each other now instead of letting blowhards represent them in some way.
Well I’m an athiest and I hadn’t heard of either of these movies.
Your warning about the middle of the movie might apply to me. I didn’t find that modern-day Noah movie entirely reprehensible. I was also raised roman catholic so I would know what they’re talking about. I suppose a community made movie might be alright but paying box-office prices to see it might be a bit much.
I think in the end, the people who might share the same POV as Bill might not even care to see it in movie form. Either they don’t like belittling or they think it’s a moot point.
For me religion was something I was never really sure about. I’m still not and that’s why I’m an athiest. I can’t say for sure whether a diety exists or not because I can’t provide empirical proof either way. Because of this I choose not to trouble myself in my daily life about it and rather choose to live a just and productive life.
In the end, if there were a diety who is truly benhevolent and wise, that’s probably all they would want.
I forgot to post the follow-on comparison to Jesus Camp.
Expelled did quite well, considering it was an Intelligent Design (Christians) advocacy movie about atheism (“Darwinists”).
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=expelled.htm
Jesus Camp was nominated for an Oscar… Is Expelled even in the running for a documentary Oscar nomination?
I can’t imagine why this film would do so good in America either!
God is an attractive subject for a lot of people in this country, and I’m sure most people in this country would rather look at kirk for an hour and a half than watch maher talk about religion.
Oh please tell me you guys don’t actually believe these so-called “documentaries” that are released in theaters are “non-fiction.” Sure they are not typical movie productions, but they are FAR from non-fiction. I hate when they are called “documentaries.” History Channel’s show about the USS Enterprise (WWII battleship, not Star Trek) was a documentary. Discovery’s Atlas series is a documentary. All of this garbage you see in the theaters by people like Maher, Moore, and anyone else releasing so-called “documentaries” in the theaters, those are called documentary style movies. Or what I like to call “mockumentaries.” Seriously guys, they are movie productions like everything else. Sure they use some real people in there, but sorry to tell you this, a lot of the people in these mockumentaries are actually paid actors, or simply normal people paid to say a certain thing that supports their point. And even the people who were not paid, their comments are cut and rearranged in a way so their message is different than they originally intended.
I’m not talking specifically about Religulous, I haven’t seen it, but it’s true with everyone mockumentary I’ve seen so far.
If you don’t believe me, go watch Fahrenheit 9/11 again. I know it’s torture, but just look for these things. One of his first “experts” claims to have been in some “joint” operation between the FBI and CIA investigating something to do with terrorism prior to 9/11. Well, I’m sure if Moore would have done some research, he would have realized that before the creation of The Department of Homeland Security which was a RESULT of 9/11, the sharing of information pertaining to terrorism between the FBI and CIA was ILLEGAL and thus, IMPOSSIBLE for this so-called “joint operation” to have occurred prior to 9/11. Sorry to tell you, but that guy was paid to say that.
Then look at the scene with the family talking about their son that was killed in Iraq. Moore cut the interview to turn their praise of their son into a sob story that had an anti-war flavor. That same family angrily protested the movie afterward when they saw that their words were twisted so he can use them in his documentary to prove his own point of view. They have said that they are proud of their son and that they DON’T feel that he died in vain. They are not idiots like so many other people are and realize if you talk down about the conflict they fought and died in after they voluntarily joined the military in a time of conflict, you are talking down the efforts and sacrifice of that person. I HATE it when these people pretend to be fighting for our troops. They are not, they are fighting for their own political agenda and are using our troops as a sympathetic argument. We in the military do not WANT these morons using us for their cause. But anyway, sorry again, that was an example where he took real people’s statements and twisted their meaning for his mockumentary.
So please, I don’t care if you like them. I don’t care if you agree with them, but just at least stop trying to convince everyone that they are “non-fiction” or are “documentaries.” I watch documentaries all the time, yes I’m a dork, but I love all of those Battle for Midway shows, or the shows talking about how modern weaponry came to be, or whatever. Those are documentaries. The stuff you see in the theaters are entertainment, nothing more.
I personally enjoyed Religulous. And judging by the reaction in the theatre, so did most people there.
Really, it’s hilarious. Maybe not so much if you’re religious since the film does have some of the most ridiculous bunch out of the religious crowd. Like people who believe in end times and all that.
I hadn’t heard of Fireproof. Sounds like it could be a good movie?
I’m sure I’ll be downloading Religulous. Maybe Fireproof too if I like the trailer.
Well, speaking as one of those spiteful atheist types, I was wavering on whether I wanted to see it or not. Frankly, there’s a sort of a fish-in-a-barrel aspect to these kinds of films: in any creed, it’s too easy to find a crop of over-the-top true believers to poke fun at, and the previews I saw seemed to indicate the movie was going to go in that direction.
Unfortunately, I didn’t get to decide on my own because (as some have touched on here) no theater in my area would carry it–I think I looked and the nearest one was St Louis, 3 hours away :/. So that’s definitely a factor.
Religulous was hilarious. Of course, if you believe in magic, you might think otherwise, as it does insult the intelligence of believers.
An exercise in intellectual superiority? Yup. And I don’t care.
“Granted, Fireproof opened on 60% more screens”
Logic does not apply???
Religilous hasn’t been showing at any theater in the Myrtle Beach, SC area.
I imagine there are probably other backwards areas of the country that also refuse to air it.
I suspect this might explain the difference in box office numbers…