Why Fox has an epic problem

So the Fox exec eagerly reminded me that it was only fair that with the release of "Australia" I would have to take note of the streak's end, since it was obvious that a Baz Luhrmann film would surely be a critic's delight. Well, all I can is: Barely.

For all its directorial ambition, "Australia" just squeaked into positive Rotten Tomatoes territory, scoring a 53, which, to give a little perspective, means that it got the same score as last summer's forgettable comedy "Get Smart." So the streak is over, but it's probably a Pyrrhic victory. "Australia" has bigger problems, having stumbled out of the starting gate at the box office, barely grossing $20 million in its first five days of release.

The problem with "Australia," despite its hefty budget -- $130 million plus a giant wad of marketing expenses -- is that it's the ultimate tweener. It's an epic art film. But epics need movie stars, which "Australia" lacks, and art films need great reviews, along with ardent audience buzz, to find a sizable audience. So far, the consensus on "Australia" is that for all its bravura filmmaking, it feels naggingly unsatisfying.

As history shows, it's almost impossible for a film with "Australia's" mediocre critical response to land a best picture nomination, which robs Fox of an important marketing tool in keeping the film afloat in a crowded marketplace. Fox execs insist the movie will attract tons of adults in weeks to come, citing the film's weekend numbers, which went up significantly as the weekend unfolded, a signal that it had strong word-of-mouth support.