Why It Doesn't Matter That Megan Fox Is Not a Box Office Draw

Being Megan Fox means establishing herself as a brand, not just an actress. She's one of the new breed of stars for whom every public appearance and interview is part of the performance; the actual credits she accumulates on her IMDb page are just a small portion of her 24/7 workload. It's a career of the sort pioneered by Madonna (who's never been just a musician, but has always been in the Madonna business) and carried on these days by celebrities like Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton and Heidi Montag. As long as personalities like Fox stay in the public eye (say, by being mentioned on sites like ours), they're earning their keep.

What are the specific job requirements for being Megan Fox? She has to keep her 15 minutes of fame going by A) looking hot; B) saying outrageous things in interviews; and C) looking hot.

By those standards, she did exactly what was required of her for 'Jonah Hex.' During the shoot, she did A very well, since about all she was asked to do was show how well she could fill out a corset. And before the movie's release, she promoted it by doing plenty of B and C. Nonetheless, 'Jonah Hex' remained an ill-conceived, watered-down version of an obscure comic book in a tough-sell genre (westerns) with a leading man who has also never successfully opened a picture. That it tanked can't really be blamed on Fox.

Fox in 'Jonah Hex'

Fox performed more or less the same duties for 'Jennifer's Body,' though she was also called upon to actually, you know, act. Critics differed on the quality of her performance, but the movie did earn $31.6 million at the worldwide box office, or about twice its $16 million budget. Certainly, the film did better than it would have if some lesser-known, less-flashy starlet had played the lead. So while it doesn't bode well for a career as a leading lady in mega-budget studio films, 'Jennifer's Body' is also not a career-killing flop. She should continue to be in demand for low-budget indie and horror films, especially as long as she remains a figure of tabloid interest who can generate enough free publicity to cover her modest salary.

True, the B part of her duties -- being outspoken in interviews -- may cost her gigs in the short run. Her frequent disses of both the 'Transformers' franchise and its director, Michael Bay, may have led to her departure from the forthcoming 'Transformers 3.' The actual circumstances of the split are in dispute; Fox has said she quit, while Bay has said he let her go, not because of her badmouthing him and the movies, but because he simply wanted to take the story in a different direction. (Maybe a different direction means blonde instead of brunette, or maybe it means hiring another newbie, like Fox was before the first 'Transformers' movie, who'll be so grateful for the opportunity to star in a surefire blockbuster that she'll do whatever Bay tells her to do without question.)

Fox's criticisms of 'Transformers' had to do with what she called Bay's dictatorial manner (she compared him to Hitler and Napoleon), his disregard for his actors' safety and the fact that, especially in 'Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen,' the human actors were little more than props, while the robots and special effects took center stage. Then again, the fact that Bay has replaced her with someone even more prop-like only seems to vindicate her criticisms. Even 'Transformers' lead Shia LaBeouf has backed up her complaints in recent interviews.

Still, that second 'Transformers' movie grossed $402.1 million in North America last year and $836.3 million worldwide, in no small part due to Fox's willingness to promote it tirelessly around the world, despite her misgivings about the movie. The rounds she's made for the three movies she's released in the past 12 months suggest that, for all her blunt candor, she's still a team player, something Hollywood should appreciate.

Last week, Fox said she's still attached to produce and possibly star in an adaptation of the comic book 'Fathom.' She insisted that the movie will happen even if she has to give the lead role to another actress. Of course, if she gives the role to some other twentysomething starlet, who do you think the press will want to interview more, that performer or the movie's famous, hot, quotable producer? One way or another, Megan Fox will continue to capitalize on her notoriety.

•Follow Gary Susman on Twitter @garysusman.

Filed under:
• Movie News
-
• Pop-Ed