The movie, a PG-13 adaptation of the “Jack and the Beanstalk” fairy tale directed by Bryan Singer, took in about $28 million, enough for No. 1 but roughly half of what would have been considered a success. First place does not always mean as much at a time when studios spend so heavily on so-called tentpole films designed to appeal to the widest possible audience.

Warner Brothers and a financing partner spent about $190 million to make “Jack the Giant Slayer.” Global marketing costs added another $80 million or so to the price tag. Jeff Goldstein, Warner Brothers’ executive vice president for domestic distribution, defended the movie’s performance in a telephone interview on Sunday.

“Our audience in the United States was a little bit more narrow than we wanted, but the Canadian numbers are really strong, and the overseas reaction has exceeded our expectations,” he said. “The story on this movie is far from being written — we need more time.”

The problem: Disney’s “Oz the Great and Powerful,” which goes after a nearly identical audience, rolls out around the world next weekend and is attracting very strong advance interest, according to box office analysts.

“Jack the Giant Slayer” took in $13.7 million over the weekend from release in 10 Asian countries, a result the studio called “stellar.” Warner Brothers hopes that “Jack the Giant Slayer” could ultimately take in $225 million or more from foreign theaters — possibly enough for the movie to break even. (About 50 percent of global ticket sales go to theater owners.)

Regardless, “Jack the Giant Slayer” extends a grim streak for Warner. The studio won best picture at the Oscars for “Argo” — no small feat — but has now sustained four box office failures in a row, starting with “Gangster Squad” and continuing with the fantasy “Beautiful Creatures” and “Bullet to the Head.”

Mr. Goldstein noted that American moviegoers had not been responding to much of anything of late. For the weekend ticket sales totaled about $110 million, a 35 percent decline from the same three days last year, according to Hollywood.com, which compiles box office data. Ticket sales so far this year total $1.55 billion, an 8 percent decline compared with the same period in 2012; attendance has declined 9 percent.

“Identity Thief” (Universal Pictures), one of the few movies to break out in recent months, was second for the weekend. It took in about $9.7 million, for a four-week total of $107.4 million.

“21 Over,” a new R-rated teenage comedy from Relativity Media, was third, selling an estimated $9 million in tickets; it cost $13 million to make. “The Last Exorcism: Part II” (CBS Films) was fourth, with about $8 million in ticket sales. Fifth place went to “Snitch” (Lionsgate), which had $7.7 million in sales, for a two-week total of $24.4 million.

“Jack the Giant Slayer” received mixed reviews but a B-plus score from ticket buyers in exit polls. The film gestated at Warner’s New Line division and was partly paid for by Legendary Entertainment; at one point it looked like a solid bet. It had a marquee director in Mr. Singer, best known for his work with the “X-Men” franchise, and thematic similarities to “Alice in Wonderland,” which took in more than $1 billion worldwide for Disney in 2010.

So what made this beanstalk wilt so terribly?

Start with a glut of bedtime-story adaptations following the success of “Alice,” longtime film producers and box office analysts said. When lightning strikes in Hollywood it prompts an immediate imitation reflex among studios. But the results are rarely good, and this instance has been no different.

Universal’s “Snow White and the Huntsman” did the best, with about $400 million in global ticket sales. But the disappointments have been many: “Beastly,” “Red Riding Hood,” “Mirror Mirror,” “Hansel Gretel: Witch Hunters.” “The problem is that the audience is really savvy today and judges each film as its own entity,” said Paul Dergarabedian, an analyst for Hollywood.com.

Warner also got tangled in the elaborate computer-generated effects needed to make “Jack the Giant Slayer.” Digital Domain, a visual effects company hired by the studio to work on the movie, started to sputter financially while the film was unfinished. Warner was also having a hard time striking the right tone — too scary could turn off families, too tame might alienate Mr. Singer’s fanboy base. The studio changed the title from “Jack the Giant Killer” last summer after deciding that “Slayer” would be a better draw for young men and would go over better with parents.

The initial plan was to release the movie last June. But with the visual effects still not up to snuff, Warner bumped the movie to early March, a tricky time for attracting the broad audience that big-budget pictures need to earn back their investments. Disney succeeded with “Alice” in 2010 yet failed badly with “John Carter” last year.

But “Oz the Great and Powerful” was already camped out in mid-March, when spring break starts.

As studios increasingly churn out behemoth movies designed to play globally, release windows have narrowed. Jeffrey Katzenberg, chief executive of DreamWorks Animation, cited a crowded Christmas as one reason his studio’s “Rise of the Guardians” fizzled; it took in more than $303 million worldwide but still required an $87 million write-down because of high costs.

“Increased competition makes the need for quality release dates critically important,” Mr. Katzenberg said last week.

Uninspired advertising was the next problem that “Jack the Giant Slayer” encountered, according to multiple people who worked on the movie.

A big push for “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey” and the Oscar campaign for “Argo” strained Warner’s resources; the studio also continued to have a hard time deciding what audience to go after.

The bickering eventually spilled onto Twitter, with Mr. Singer apologizing for terrible “airbrushed images” that “do the film no justice.”

Mr. Goldstein dismissed the notion that advertising was a problem. “Sue Kroll’s group did a fabulous job,” he said, referring to Warner’s marketing chief. “It’s always a tremendous challenge when you try to hit a broad spectrum.”

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/04/arts/jack-the-giant-slayer-topples-at-domestic-box-office.html?partner=rss&emc=rss