‘Valerian’: A Discussion About Finances and the Language We Use

Alright, first of all, I acknowledge that perhaps some of you may be asking yourself why I’m talking about Luc Besson’s Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets, a big summer tentpole, on a day reserved for international releases. Well, at the end of the day, what makes a film ‘international’ from a U.S. perspective isn’t the predominant language being spoken, but rather the production company, or companies, supplying the funds.
Speaking of funds, and now that I’ve had my fill of being patronizing for one day, let’s talk about them in relation to this picture. I can’t remember the last time the majority of a conversation surrounding a big-time blockbuster has been about speculating its financials, as well as the standing of the biggest company behind it. So, with that in mind, like my write-up on Transformers: The Last Knight, this isn’t going to be a typical review.
Part of it is because this Valerian adaptation was bad enough in my eyes to secure a slot in my bottom 15, and I’d rather not waste too much of my time, or yours, talking about why it bored me to tears. But also, I think it’s important to discuss why we use the particular language that we do with regards to any given film’s financial success or failure, and why it matters. So please, just hear me out and we can get through this as quickly as possible.
An adaptation of the French comic series “Valérian and Laureline,” Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets is first and foremost defined by its visual splendor, with some admittedly dazzling digital effects that make its world simultaneously tangible and extraordinary. It’s too bad, however, that practically every other aspect takes a back seat.
The dialogue and scripting are poor, without any clear plot progression until its midpoint, and from then on often remains unfocused, which includes an ultimately, relatively useless appearance from Rihanna. The performances are phoned in from most of its major cast, with especially disappointing turns from Dane DeHaan and Cara Delavigne considering they’re our two leads — not to mention, their characterizations are fairly unlikeable. Without a singular, charismatic antagonist, the film drowns in its own indulgences and ends anti-climactically. When you get right down to it, anyone can make a movie look good, but if you don’t have the substance to back it up, your efforts are wasted.
Now, let us discuss the financials with a brief, selective timeline, because the last few months of this film’s budget being publicly known have been riddled with all of the hot takes. Back in mid-April, reports started coming out that Valerian was the most expensive French film ever produced, with the speculated budget hovering around $209 million. Certainly a hefty amount for any major studio, but such a number is customary in this day and age among big summer releases. But then, one had to take into account that the film would be premiering alongside Christopher Nolan’s Dunkirk, one week after Matt Reeves’s War for the Planet of the Apes and two weeks after Spider-Man: Homecoming.
Throw into the mix the news in late June that production company EuropaCorp had posted losses upwards of $135 million, more than triple its 2010 losses, and people collectively lost their minds. All of sudden, the new narrative surrounding the feature was bomb talk and cautionary tales of Hollywood excess, that Valerian was a ginormous gamble that EuropaCorp desperately needed to pay off.
Not too long after that news broke, however, EuropaCorp swiftly intervened in this discussion and tried to assure everyone that the situation wasn’t so dire. In a Forbes article by contributor Rob Cain, his investigation into the company’s books and interview with CEO Marc Schmuger found that, first of all, the “estimated final net cost after tax credits [came] in at $150 million.” Secondly, per Schmuger, the “financial exposure after equity financing and foreign sales from our many partners around the world is less than 10% of the budget. In other words… the total cost to the company is not $200 million or $150 million, but under $20 million of financial exposure.”
Since then, the consensus around many major publications has been that budget was more likely around $180 million, not $209 million. And perhaps even more assuring were the words coming from Besson, himself. In an interview with Screen Daily’s Melanie Goodfellow, Besson explained why he isn’t so worried for his lifelong dream venture: “Like every film company, [EuropaCorp] will only greenlight a project if at least 80% of its budget is covered. With Valerian, we’ve covered 96% of the budget with pre-sales.”
So, with EuropaCorp’s share allegedly coming down to a mere $7.2 million, you can see why the film wouldn’t seem like such a great risk. Besson even hinted that maybe the initial reports of an overinflated budget were essentially a hit job by a rival company, saying, “I heard that a newspaper did write a bit of shit about the company but actually this newspaper belongs to another company that is going to release a film at the same time. It sounds to me like a very, very below the belt attack.” It also sounds, to me, like a bunch of gossip, but hey, there’s no need for a frowny face because Valerian and EuropaCorp will be just fine.
And then the film premiered, and the numbers really didn’t look so hot.
With the weekend actuals in as of yesterday, Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets placed fifth among all films at the box office with a domestic gross of just over $17 million. Weekend rivals Dunkirk and Girls Trip snagged the first and second spots, respectively, after both films earned rave reviews, while the collective reaction for Valerian was mixed at best. Initial projections for Dunkirk were that it would scrap with Girls Trip for the number one slot and make gains around $40 million, but those guesses were proved underestimations when it accrued closer to $50.5 million and currently holds a worldwide gross of just under $107.5 million.
With the opening weekend out of the way, interesting news broke that by Monday’s close of trading, EuropaCorp’s stock value dropped 8.31%.
Now, we come to language and the phrasing we use as film industry journalists and who in particular we address regarding a film’s success or failure. In the previously mentioned Screen Daily interview, Besson admitted that the bigger risk for EuropaCorp wouldn’t be the lining of their pockets, but rather their reputation. “The risk for the company,” he says, “is more one of notoriety. If the film is a big flop, we’ll lose credibility for making these sorts of films. The risk is not financial, but rather human.” Not only are we seeing the ‘human’ risk turning into a financial one with EuropaCorp’s stock falling, Besson’s argument does raise a good point about where we focus attention when a movie goes wrong.
In most of these cases, we tend to reference a film’s distributor primarily because they’re the biggest name attached, even though they would have only given funds for a film’s prints and advertising instead of production. That’s why leading up to Wonder Woman, there was an intense amount of media scrutiny laid against Warner Bros. Their reputation certainly wasn’t in the hands of guaranteed first-quarter flops like CHiPs or Fist Fight, but with their only real success before Wonder Woman being The Lego Batman Movie, they were having to answer for mega-flop King Arthur: Legend of the Sword and potential loss-inducer Kong: Skull Island — the latter of which having luckily scraped by the skin of its teeth with Warner Bros.’s own kaiju cinematic universe still in the works.

Since Wonder Woman has attained the second-highest worldwide gross and highest domestic gross among D.C. Extended Universe films, WB can breathe much more easily these days. In Valerian’s case, however, with Hollywood new boys STX Films responsible for domestic distribution, EuropaCorp, which gave some of its own money for production and will distribute the film in France, is the most notable name attached, therefore the drop in stock value.
All is not completely lost yet for the Paris-born company, however, with the film yet to premiere in more than 100 territories, including France, and there’s the rational thought that the material’s international appeal will help pick up the slack. The film will debut in France tomorrow, the U.K.’s premiere is set for August 2nd and, according to Variety, “the release in China, where it’s expected to be released on 9,000 screens, has been delayed.”
It is entirely plausible that the film’s international performance will make up for its poor domestic showing, which isn’t likely to get better with the upcoming premieres of Atomic Blonde and The Emoji Movie, as well as the likelihood that War for the Planet of the Apes and Dunkirk will remain relatively strong. Then again, given this probable scenario, what if it doesn’t? Word spreads fast, and mixed reactions from all countries that have already seen it may have an adverse effect on the film’s international stats, and if that’s the case, it’s hard to imagine all seven production companies involved in the film’s production wanting to go ahead with the planned trilogy.
It shouldn’t be too hard for EuropaCorp to break even on its $7.2 million investment if the numbers are correct, but what about the other six companies that ponied up at least four times what EuropaCorp did? Unlikely as it may be, even if the other six companies shared a 16% piece of the pie, assuming the film tanks internationally, breaking even on $28.8 million, which normally doesn’t sound like much, might be a difficult task. If some of the studios come in well short of what they invested, they might be understandably reluctant to go in on future films. And let’s not forget that they may share in the human risk becoming a financial one for themselves.
But as far as the public is concerned, EuropaCorp is the one with the biggest target on its back, and for good reason. Reputation means everything in an industry as unpredictable as cinema. Additional good fortune came Warner Bros.’s way when Dunkirk surpassed expectations, but it could have just as easily stayed the course or lost out to Girls Trip if the reviews weren’t as kind. The further you are in the spotlight, which is normally indicative of your prominence, the more you have to lose.
Will we see other Valerian movies in the future? Maybe, maybe not. Anything’s possible if toy sales can help a Power Rangers sequel see the light of day after that film drastically underperformed. EuropaCorp will likely remain just fine after Valerian’s close, but that doesn’t mean the other companies won’t feel the brunt of the burden. So if you grew up reading the “Valérian and Laureline” comics, or are just vaguely interested in the picture either because of Luc Besson’s name recognition or because of its eye-catching visuals, now’s the time to gather up what you have to better ensure this fledgling franchise continues to have a pulse.
1.5/5
