Well, the public has spoken. And the track record of content called THE APPRENTICE continues to be somewhere between underwhelming and pathetic.
This past weekend, the movie of that name finally opened after months of behind-the-scenes lobbying, buyouts, politically incentivized rhetoric and outright campaigning for the world at large to have the chance to see it.
It took until early this morning for DEADLINE’s Ted Johnson to be among the first to actually weigh in with actual data on how it was received by said world, or at least the U.S. box office. The normally verbose Johnson was uncharacteristically succinct:
The Apprentice opened to a lackluster $1.58 million at the box office over the weekend.
It took of all sources THE IRISH TIMES, and the intrepid duo of Hannah Broughton and John O’ Sullivan, to provide any context of consequence to that number:
The new Donald Trump biopic, The Apprentice, launched in US cinemas recently has reportedly failed to create any significant buzz at the box office…(d)espite a hefty $16 million spent on production and being showcased across 1,750 screens(.)
But they did throw a carrot (potato?) of good news out there, if for no other reason than they apparently have a horse of their own in this race:
Helmed by Iranian/Danish director Ali Abassi, the contentious movie stars Sebastian Stan as a young Trump and Jeremy Strong as Roy Cohn, the Republican fixer, offering a glimpse of Trump’s life in the gritty New York of the 1970s, reports the Express US.
In spite of the lackluster initial showings across the States, the critics have offered up chiefly favorable judgments, and Briarcliff Entertainment, its distributor, is rumored to be angling for awards season glory.
Manohla Dargis from The New York Times observed: “Each actor has clearly made an attentive study of his character’s real-life counterpart, his mannerisms, how he moves, and especially his voice.”
And Dargis was apparently not alone in his praise, as a quick glimpse at the current ROTTEN TOMATOES profile validates:
Honestly, those scores aren’t all that bad. In fact, Johnson surprisingly added this tidbit:
One of the figures portrayed in the movie — Roger Stone, a longtime Trump ally who helped steer him to a career in politics — actually praised the portrayals.
Unfotunately, the only “review” that warranted Johnson’s attention happened to come from one of the least credentialed sources:
In (a) middle-of-the-night Truth Social post, Donald Trump weighed in the movie The Apprentice, unsurprisingly calling it a “cheap, defamatory and politically disgusting hatchet job.” Trump’s full Truth Social post:
“A FAKE and CLASSLESS Movie written about me, called, The Apprentice (Do they even have the right to use that name without approval?), will hopefully “bomb.” It’s a cheap, defamatory, and politically disgusting hatchet job, put out right before the 2024 Presidential Election, to try and hurt the Greatest Political Movement in the History of our Country, ‘MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!’ My former wife, Ivana, was a kind and wonderful person, and I had a great relationship with her until the day she died. The writer of this pile of garbage, Gabe Sherman, a lowlife and talentless hack, who has long been widely discredited, knew that, but chose to ignore it. So sad that HUMAN SCUM, like the people involved in this hopefully unsuccessful enterprise, are allowed to say and do whatever they want in order to hurt a Political Movement, which is far bigger than any of us. MAGA2024!”
Normally, one would dismiss these ramblings as yet another by-product of McDonald’s-induced IBS. Given the actual reception from moviegoers, in this rare case he actually might have been on to something. He probably should have used numbers to back up his contention.
Then again, he never did learn how to accurately interpret numbers when the OG TV series aired, despite the best efforts of NBC executives I know personally to attempt to.
One senior level NBC researcher told me in detail how she was tasked with the challenge of directly dealing with him in early morning darkness the day after a new episode aired. In that era, networks provided hotlines for people to call in on once “fast nationals” were released, typically in the 8 AM Pacific hour. For an East Coast-based sleep avoider, that didn’t play. So usually in the 5 AM hour, she’d get a call from his personal phone, often while en route somewhere on his private plane. At that time of day, top market overnight ratings from 56 designated market areas were all that were available; disparate and not necessarily indicative. NBC was notoriously weaker in the larger cities; it wasn’t until you’d hit St. Louis, about 20 markets down, before you’d get a large double-digit rating and #1 in time slot story. It was only then when the researcher’s rattling off of numbers would be stopped and she could hear him yell across a few aisles, “Melania, get over here! Write this down!” After a fair amount of grumbling, his diligent “apprentice” would ostensibly start jotting down the list of city-by-city numbers.
Would you be surprised to learn that whenever he was asked to speak on the record, somehow the St. Louis numbers stood in for the nationals?
The actual track record of the first six seasons of the show, before celebrities were involved, showed a steady decline from 20.7 million to 7.5 million viewers. When the civilian-only format made a one-time comeback three years after Season 6, that number had declined yet again to 4.7 million viewers. Even with the celebrity infusion, by the time Trump’s last season aired in early 2015 it averaged just 6.1 million viewers.
I highly doubt those are numbers Melania or her hubby have memorialized anywhere, but I know they are readily available for reporters to reference when considering the actual potential beyond art house enthusiasts for anything with that name. If I could Google it, so could they.
So if there was indeed a belief that this story should be seen as its supporters insisted “election interference” claims notwithstanding, I wonder why it was so damn important for this to be released in theatres.
Maybe this wasn’t as existential a threat to democracy as its subject? Maybe it’s as much of a story about Roy Cohn than it is Trump? Maybe it’s a period piece with little appeal beyond a select group of coastal elites who might have been around when the purported events actually happened?
I can’t speak to that, and honestly the idea of going to a movie in a theater now is something I can’t consider for a variety of legally-based reasons. Let’s just say that fact doesn’t thrill me, but it is what it is.
But I do know there are plenty of people, especially in a few select states, who might have wanted to see it, but just might not have the time or resources to do so. Art houses and their food prices are anything but cheap.
What, Amazon, you’re willing to air Kyrie Irving documentaries but not this?
I hope that Sherman and Abassi remember those choices when they are up for a Golden Globe or an Oscar next year. Or maybe a BAFTA award. The latter might provide them the only welcome environment by that point.
Until next time…