10 'Next Big Thing' Movies That Completely Flopped
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 июл 2024
- Tell Peter Jackson and Ang Lee that high frame rates are NEVER gonna catch on.
For more awesome content, check out: whatculture.com/
Follow us on Facebook at: / whatculture
Catch us on Twitter: / whatculture 
Развлечения
I still say to this day that Disney dropped the ball on the John Carter marketing. That was a fun as hell movie.
Agree 100%. It should have been called John Carter, Warlord of Mars, or John Carter and The Princess of Mars. Something to give it a Pulp sci-fi feel. And better movie posters, for God's sake. But that ridiculous budget was almost impossible to overcome.
They bought Marvel during production and decided that comic book movies would fill their Young Male demographic without having to do the work of introducing a generation to a pulp era hero. I love the books and I really enjoyed the movie, since it brought my favorite literary character of all time to life- Tars Tarkas!
Really liked that movie. Disappointed that it didn't do better.
@tstockel
Disney didn’t want to call it “Princess of Mars” because that could get audiences confused about whether or not this film is a Disney Princess film.
Disney is really protective about their Disney Princess marketing, and putting the word “Princess” in the title of this film would get Disney fans wondering if Disney would add John Carter’s royal love interest to the Disney Princess lineup.
They already have a dispute over the Tarzan property with the Edgar Rice Burroughs estate...adding the Princess of Barsoom to the Disney Princess lineup would only complicate things further.
Disney also thought that little boys wouldn’t want to see a movie with the word “princess” in the title because said boys would think that the movie is too girly. Once again, you could chalk that notion up to being an unfortunate byproduct of Disney marketing their princess characters for little girls.
Disney also noted the then recent failure of other movies with the word Mars in the title...and Disney execs thought that girls didn’t want to see a movie with the word “Mars” in the title either. Yet another sexist preconceived notion on the part of studio execs that misunderstands the views of the audience.
@tstockel
So, since Disney didn’t want to include Mars or Princess in the title...they couldn’t call the film “Princess of Mars” or “Warlord of Mars”. They were stuck with the protagonist’s name as a title. They could have called the movie “John Carter: Warlord of Barsoom” or just “Barsoom” but to the lay person who has never heard of the Barsoom books..”Barsoom” would be a nonsense word.
So Disney decided to call the movie “John Carter”. That creates a further problem: “John Carter” is a fairly common name in the English speaking world. For example, there is a character on the TV series “ER” called John Carter. That’s why the title of the film turned out to be so unappealing and dull that it contributed to the failure of the film. The audience didn’t know why the John Carter of the film was so special judging by the title of the movie alone. It’s because there are other people and characters with the same name who are completely unrelated to the Barsoom novels.
I mean, Tron Legacy made $400 million off a $170 million budget. For a 2010 release, that's not terrible.
Not Terrible? It's Fantastic! Figure $170 budget, $100 promotions, o that's $270 and it gets $130 million profit at th box office and t least night $100 million din dvd/bluray, and streaming. Those numbers are fantastic!!
Hollywood's idea of positive results has become such nonsense. They call Black Adam a flop and blame The Rock but it made $400 million! How is a movie that made $400 million unsuccesful? It's not the rock's fault that they can't properly budget. He's trying to star in, produce, and promote a movie. He's expected to be the bean counter too?
400 million isn't jack on a budget 170. Theaters take half, and thats not even promotion cost. It was a flop. Lost money. But yeah, it was a decent movie.
It would have needed at least $600 million to be successful. A movie has to make three times budget and promotion to be a hit.
Wasn’t it also during a writers strike too??
@@johnbogg7395 that’s by todays standards. Slightly different in 2010. But…maybe.
In the spirit of Bronny James, you should have included After Earth. A perfect example of superstar talent trying to force his glaringly less talented and undeserving son into stardom with unearned opportunity.
not a fair comparison. Bronny hasn't done shit to prove he deserves to be in the NBA. Jaden was actually very successful as a kid with movies like The Pursuit of Happyness and The Karate Kid reboot.
Unpopular opinion, I thought john carter was a good movie that just wasn't given a chance it deserved
I liked it but can see why it did not do enough at the box office. Like a lot of films the problem was, the budget was too big.
Agreed! I thought it was great and worthy of a sequel (or two)
When I went to the cinema and asked to see John Carter, for a second they thought I was asking to speak to someone like a member of staff or a manager
😂
I think they should have given it a different name - if not A Princess of Mars, at least something a little more interesting or descriptive than a bland generic name
@@weston407 That I think is the biggest blunder they made in that whole project. Princess suggests swashbuckling. Like the Princess Bride. You think you might get that just hearing that word. Mars obviously suggests Sci-Fi. That's what this movie is, Swashbuckling Sci-Fi. People who would be into that sort of thing would flock to this movie just on the title alone, if it were called The Princess of Mars.
To this day it is still one of the best sci-fi adventure movies i have seen. It is a shame it didn't catch on.
Possibly would have made more sense to just name the film Barzoom, the name of the planet Mars in the local tongues.
@@danielciocilteu3545 "The Princess of Mars' Barzoomgas" 🍈🍈😋
I expected you to include "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow." When it came out it was endlessly hyped as the first movie shot entirely with green screen. It flopped, even though it wasn't that bad.
I enjoyed Sky Captain mostly, but I wasn't surprised it flopped.
I liked it but it felt like the movie was shot through Vaseline 😂
I do like that movie very much
I actually liked John Carter, it had a good story potential
I thought so too! Of course, I was watching it on TV, and I was very confused to learn that it was called “John Carter”.
Watched it and thought it was pretty good. Not sure why everyone seemed to have a problem with it. No classic but had a good time.
It was better than I expected. I had low expectations at first.
Me: How many Robin Hood and King Arthur films you need to make before you stop trying?
Movie studios: All of them.
You can make a Robin Hood movie and make a lot of money. It just needs to be a good movie that looks like it's going to be very entertaining. You can make a King Arthur movie and make a lot of money. It just needs to be a good movie that looks like it's going to be very entertaining. And if it really is very entertaining, people will want to see a sequel. Ideas are nothing; execution is everything.
The mummy wasn’t the first one of that universe, that was the forgettable Dracula movie they had put out
Dracula Untold
The Dracula movie was pretty good tho
i really liked that movie
The main issue with these "franchises" is that they all just PG-13 brain-diarrhea....no wonder it will flop! I can understand if Disney would roll in this area....BUT all the other studios could have done better!
@@randomabuser Meh...🙄
Even before the slap, people are already tired of Will Smith. Now we have two? And the younger one is suppose to be the worse than the older one when in reality it's the opposite
😂😂😂I'm more shock2d that this idiot started that clip by saying will smith has more star power than anyone in Hollywood.
For me I didn’t want to go watch The Mummy, because I thought they wanted to remake the mummy franchise and I just didn’t want to support replacing Brendan Fraser
Here here!
One of the smartest things said in the whole comment section.
Tron and John Carter were good
Totally, especially with the fact that Legacy had a plot, unlike it's source material, and John Carter was frigging hilarious.
When Marvel published a John Carter comic book decades ago, they used the much more dramatic title "John Carter, Warlord of Mars". A movie title like that would have been more evocative and might have brought more people into the theaters.
Even the Asylum mockbuster used the advertising "Based on the classic novel that inspired "Avatar"."
See...if the movie John Carter had the Warlord of Mars title, it would have been more successful. Disney was just being chicken on making a more dramatic title for the film.
John Carter would have done better not as a Disney prospect, but as something more akin to its original novel and comic books, less PG more R, it’s suppose to feel like Conan but on Mars… for those curious what I mean google Deja thorns princess of mars..
@@thomasgilbert2266 Then when Disney got a hold of the John Carter property, they should have used their Touchstone Pictures label to properly release a film that was truer to the book.
Disney did Solo dirty though. They fired the two original directors, Phillip Lord and Chris Miller, more than halfway through filming, and brought in Ron Howard. Howard came in and did a huge amount of reshoots. I also remember reading an interview with Alden Ehrenreich saying that Howard was so dead set on him acting like Harrison Ford that he brought in an acting coach to work with and sit in on set with him. Alden said the entire experience was demeaning.
Boo hoo. An actor complaining about getting direction. My heart breaks.
I bought d-box tickets by mistake once, don't remember which movie but I remember walking out afterward with a sore neck and stiff muscles. Those seats threw us around like ragdolls
I just saw twisters in D-Box and it was awesome
The Problem with the John Carter of Mars film was that over the years (The first book was published in 1911) all the things that made it special and original had been completely ripped off by other film and literary franchises, sometimes more than once.
For example when Star Wars ripped off Dune (Frank Herbert actually said he could not use most of the plot from his first novel in David Lynches first verion because Star Wars had already done it), it got all the stuff Dune had ripped off from John Carter too.
DC comics The Martian Manhunter took most of its world building from John Carter (Different coloured Martians with differnt powers and species) and worked it in to the DC Universe as a whole, Even Superman having powers on earth he did not have on Krypton, came from John Carter having powers on Mars he did not have on earth, because of the difference in Atmosphere and gravity. The first major Rip off was the first Flash Gordon newspaper cartoons and novelisation, then Movie serial adaptations, which basically just changed the name of the Lead character and his method of getting to Mars/Mongo. (Ironically Flash was himself ripped of by Crash Corrigan and the Undersea Kingdom only a year of so later) which was also highly influenced by the Buck Roger newspaper strip, which would itself become a film serial in time.
So only bits of of the Novel "A princess of Mars" and "Moons of Mars" themuch longer newspaper serialised version the novel was edited from, made it's way in to the Disney film, though there had been a straight to video adaptation three years earlier actually called "A princess of Mars" which was much more true (as far as it could be on a tiny, TINY budget) to the spirit of the original novel and actually made a virtue in it's advertising that Star wars, Avatar, Flash Gordon, Superman and a half dozen other major Sci Fi franchises had stolen from the story it was adapting. (In japan it was actually releasd as Avatar on Mars)
I watched Tron: Legacy in real d 3D and it was an amazing theater experience. I’ll never forgive audiences for letting it flop.
It didn’t exactly flop
@@kwcy92 true it actually had a decent box office return but it's considered a flop in the industry and the fact that it took 13 years to greenlight a sequel proves that.
It's almost like people enjoy different things or something
You talk about interactive gimmicks failing in theatres, which is fair. But what about Black Mirror's Bandersnatch?
That was an interactive movie with multiple endings and was talked about for months. Highly recommended if people are looking for interactive "gimmicks" done successfully.
Yes and no; for sure was trying to be unique and whatever, but also only released on Netflix. Cinemas are all over the world, whereas Netflix is only available in so many places, and even then, in those different countries have whole different streaming lineups
The only time I didn't mind D-Box was for a group 3D gaming experience. Tight, ten minutes or so of 8 people shooting up a haunted carnival, with the high point of the D-Box seating being a roller coaster, where I was quite frankly shocked at how immersive it was for that purpose, with just some solonoids tilting and jostling the seats, and careful use of air-flow to make you feel the cart had crested, and was accelerating down the track.
Was fun for a tight experience like that, would happily do it again. Wouldn't want to experience it for much more than that at a stretch.
John Carter of Mars was supposed to be the dawn of a franchise. That didn't seem to workout very well. Not only did it flop but it basically ended the career of its lead actor.
The Golden Compass series died at birth due to the studio gutting the story which had a very anti christianity theme in its source material. They feared the controversy this would cause and instead doomed the series by botching the delivery.
M Night's avatar film really belongs here as well.
I actually thought Solo was a pretty good movie!!
Me too.
I will never understand the hatred.
I like it.
1:37 technically it was Dracula untold 😅😅😅
The sad thing is that John Carter and Solo were not bad movies at all. Both of them were pretty fun IMO.
I am sure i read that the Mummy failed as Cruise demanded rewrites to give him more screen time.
_"I need more scenes where I'm running!"_
The Mummy with Tom Cruise wasn’t an original movie. It was a reboot of previous highly successful Mummy films.
Cruise ruins most of what he touches.
@marianparoo1544
Cruise didn’t ruin Top Gun or the Mission Impossible movies though. Top Gun and the Mission Impossible movies were fairly successful in the box office. The first Mission Impossible movie with Tom Cruise in it was successful enough to spawn a whole film franchise even though it’s based on a television series.
The Mummy failed not because of Tom Cruise alone, but because it couldn’t top the success of the Brendan Fraser Mummy films let alone the cultural icon that was the original Universal Classic monster movie of the 1930s. This is probably because the movie had several factors that lead to its failure: poor scriptwriting, poor direction, it deviated too far from the original, bad special effects, or because the audience didn’t want to see a female Mummy as the villain.
A Screenrant article says that the failure of the Tom Cruise Mummy movie could also be blamed on misleading marketing. If a film doesn’t have good marketing, then the audience wouldn’t know what to expect when they buy tickets for the film. If the marketing is really bad or misleading, then potential viewers won’t want to see the film.
However, if Tom Cruise really had full creative control over the production of the film, then the failure of this film would be largely his fault...but it still isn’t *just* his fault in that case. It’s that no one put their foot down and said no to the decisions that were made that ended up contributing to the lackluster quality of the film.
The problem with trying to do a King Arthur movie is that it will never get out of the shadow of coconuts, Trojan rabbits, the invincible black knight and knights that say Ni.
And Anarcho-syndicallist communes controlled by committees...
@@caronstout354I didn't vote for it
@@caronstout354 There you go on about class again...
Tron Legacy is a movie that didn’t deserve to fail… but Mortal Engines should never of made it past the conversation point in where two people looked at the book and just said “nah”
Gemini man I feel like was more of a vanity movie for Smith to showcase his younger self 😂
And at that time, everybody is already tired of Will Smith, now we got two?
The reaction to Tron Legacy was pretty much the same as the initial reaction to Tron on it's release. Give it another 10 years and it will receive the acclaim the it deserves. Hopefully Tron Ares bombs on release because chances are that means they have done it right!
Watched D-Box for the first time in Korea for Rise of Skywalker. There were about 3 people in the theater. It was weird and jarring for the first half, though I was largely used to it by the end. Didn’t add a thing to the experience that I cared about
Mr. Payback! I've been trying to remember the name of that movie for years! 😂
It’s not D-Box but Regal has this thing called 4DX that does basically the same thing as D-Box. I saw Fast X and a couple other movies in that format.
I don’t mind Solo at all. I actually liked the ending where he is forced to kill woody Harrelson’s character at the end. And he thought the train heist was quality.
I enjoyed the John Carter movie.
Solo wasn't a bad film but I think two things that killed it was 1) the budget because they fired the directors and Ron Howard had to salvage the film and 2) it came out too soon after Rian Johnson's dumpster fire of a movie. It was, what, only six months between them? Talk about over saturation of your brand.
Is there even a huge fan base eagerly anticipating a mummy universe? They put a weird amount stakes on that given the lack of fan base
Agreed. It's like focus groups were messing with producers. "Mummy & King Arthur flicks: that's all we wanna see!"
Disney knowingly sabotaged John Carter with an abysmal advertising effort that never even tried to market the film.
They... sabotaged something that they expected to make them money? That not only doesn't make sense, it actually makes negative sense
@@ChristophBrinkmann That's Disney logic for you. They also sabotaged 'Treasure Planet' by denying it marketing. It seems to be some sort of periodic in studio politics that sometimes happens. There was next to zero marketing of John Carter of Mars, and they even shortened the name to just "John Carter". Who the heck is John Carter? What is the name John Carter supposed to inspire in the potential audience? Feelings of Awe or confusion? John Carter of Mars promises us some intriguing story set on Mars, but just John Carter sounds bland. John Wick had a bland name but good marketing and became a whole franchise.
@@ChristophBrinkmann It become surplus to requirements once they realised they could just buy Star Wars.
@@ChristophBrinkmannNo, that actually makes total sense for Disney. They tend to think people will go see their movies just because of the Disney branding attached, not realizing no one’ll even know the things out without marketing. They did the same thing with “Strange World”
Of course the “John Carter” series of books were acknowledged in the late 70s by George Lucas to be the inspiration for a certain franchise called “Star Wars”
Also Superman and Mario
MORTAL ENGINES could've been better if Peter Jackson had hired a more well-known director
Someone who knows how make things engaging
I liked Tron Legacy too but it didn't fail for 'being ahead of it's time' because it would fail today too. It failed because it had a lead actor nobody knew and the less than stellar CG Jeff Bridges made the film a bit of a laughing stock. Fix those 2 things and I think the movie could have been more successful back in 2010.
Also, that actor was dry as cardboard
Or, how about cinemas and studios stop ripping us off and then maybe we'd go to these less than worthy titles but they'd still make their money back?
Loved Zemekis's Beowulf. Still watch it very now nd thn.
Hardcore Henry should be on the list. 1st person perspective through the whole movie. I enjoyed it, but it definitely didn’t do well.
Wasn’t the next big thing, It was a small indie film with a modest budget… that was awesome and original, but people want originality but don’t watch when it releases.
I loved this movie. I’d like to see more of it.
What do you mean by "it definitely didn’t do well"?
Budget: 2 Mil
Box office 16,8 Mil
You call that a flop? Oo
Doesn't the commentary for #3 answer the previous 'studios expect audiences will turn up just because they recognise the title'?
John Carter was filmed an hour away from where I lived and a ton of people from my hometown were casted as extras and I was too young to participate. I always took pride in that and liked it even more.
Solo was good, it was the fact that it came out after the last Jedi. The last Jedi caused a lot of people to boycott the next star wars movie, and unfortunately it was Solo
Or maybe it was just a bad movie.
solo was not good. your opinion is wrong. im sorry.
Solo was good, the Last Jedi was also good. Star Wars fans are insufferable.
I liked Solo, it wasn't as good as Rogue One, that's was a diamond in the last piles of... glass beads. But it was pretty fun, better than the main line movies imo.
Nobody boycotted that movie. People were just fatigued. Nobody cared.
Just because a bunch of incels online claimed they were going to boycott it, doesn't mean they did or it had any effect.
Saw Gemini Man at a pre screening probably close to a year before it was released. Unfinished CG so on, I was surprised it didn’t do well because we were very entertained and excited to see the finished film.
One critism of Tron Legacy that bothered me how rge deaging looked fake. Hello, it took place in a virtual computer world it was not supposed to looked real. All of the characters who lived in the grid has that look if I remember
Did D-Box quite a few times before the theatre remodeled and got rid of them but the best usage to me was for the 1st person action movie "Hardcore Henry." Seeing that while being tossed around was INSANE!
Is 5:13 a studio glitch or was this copy recorded four years ago?
I never understood the reasoning behind making Beowulf a CGI movie. Why not just use the actors playing the characters?
I rented it and the second I realized it was entirely CGI I noped it right back to Redbox.
#5 There is only ONE great King Arthur movie.. Excalibur (1981)
Yes. That and the Monte Python version are the only ones worth watching.
@@TestUser-cf4wjI think the King Arthur with Clive Owen was pretty good too
I'd argue Tron Legacy is better than the original after watching it a couple of times.
Really didn't like it the first time around but it has grown on me.
I fight for the User!
No kap, I STILL watch Beowulf. It’s a dope movie
@10:00 Will Smith has not had star power in years. After Earth, anyone?
Considering Bad Boys 4 is currently at $335 million USD..
The King Arthur movie was super freaking good though
10:30 Ang Lee's previous film Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk had already done 120fps before.
Coming from some who loves "Dracula untold", if it had been the success they wanted they would have called it the start of the dark universe
Will Here be on a future list? The stationary camera is a neat idea, but its little different than watching a play.
So , I guess I’m the weird one. I liked The mummy , Mortal engines , Tron legacy and John Carter.
Kevin Smith and Quentin Tarantino were both doing the universe thing WAY before Marvel came in and ruined the concept.
Otherworld wasnt mentioned or harmony of the five frequencies, I saw that film and when I found out it was cancelled I searched why apparently a character that can absorb sadness isn't engaging, it was to me, also I'm sure that would be a successful anime, also I know about the tragic passing of the lead actress so don't say that to me
Oh my God! How did those Dr.s keep their licenses?! When you have a psych patient come in and ask for more of their high dose meds, you don't give them Valium and send them home. That should be a gigantic red flag. "He would need to drive to pick up his meds." Gimme a break. Even if they didn't have home delivery, someone from his family could have gotten them for him. He should have never been out on the road. I understand having to take psych meds, i take them too, including Valium, so i understand the level of depression that makes you take those. But, detox from heroin and giving him more meds then sending him home is insane. I hope none of them suffered.
I saw Inside Out 2 n A Quiet Place: Day One both w/ D-Box seats. Was my first time using them too. I enjoyed both experiences. 😂👏
The reason that the mummy failed was because M night Shyamalan allowed Tom Cruise to rewrite and rewrite and rewrite the script so many times in order for him to be constantly in a scene. Shyamalan should have fired Tom Cruise and replace them with somebody a lot more temperamental.
Shyamalan isn't exactly a surefire director. Last Airbender, the Village, Lady in the Lake being 3 examples
5:12 tron legacy 2020?
Envy always trying to be diplomatic and optimistic about these folks who don't always have that energy.
Tron legacy and John Carter are great movies that deserve more love.
Beowolf was awesome, but yea the style was distracting.
Beowolf was a insult on all levels. I still want that time back.
The third Tron film not getting made because people were upset that the bad guys looked inhuman because of the deaging techniques is frustrating. Clu was made more monsterous because of it.
I don't ever remember a time, when anybody made a big deal about Beowolf. What year and day this movie came out.😮😮😮😢
Tron Legacy 's de-aging scenes weren't convincing back in the day.
Hey Hollywood! Read a book!
Solo suffered some backlash from The Last Jedi. It had its faults for sure, but I wish it come out at a different time so we could’ve seen how it would’ve faired on its own.
Dark universe had so much potential
D-Box with Deadpool was fun.
Dark Universe could have been fine if they had made them with lesser known actors with smaller budgets. I think that's why the Invisible Man worked with Elisabeth Moss while the Mummy flopped with Tom Cruise & Russel Crowe. BTW: I actually liked the TC Mummy... it looks and sounds great in 4k/HDR/Dolby+ and it's just sort of a fun romp... but I can see why it flopped.
Tron Legacy underperforming was frustrating. Its by no means a perfect movie, but the common complaint about a lack of action just proved people just had no idea what the IP was about.
For me if you do a big budget movie the best way to do is balancing good story and action scene. Thats it i give you example. The lords of the trilogy both critics and fans love it another is batman trilogy of Christopher nolan. Good story and many action scenes thats the secret in doing movies especially big budget film.
Why no more outros?
i tried dbox once.. changed seat 20 minutes in
In the uk, cineworld have 4dx and it's brilliant. There are so many movies we have seen now, including twister which was amazing and all the times we have been its always full
DBox seems similar to 4DX. It's great for big budget action films. I've seen The Meg and Jumanji reboot films among a few other films in 4DX.
The mistake with Gemini Man was not doing what they did in Looper. Have a younger, very similar looking actor to Will Smith wear prosthetics to make them look even more like a younger Will Smith.
Might just be me and AVGN, practical effects will ALWAYS look better in theaters and on screen than CGI.
A long time ago, I read that there are only seven plots that all fiction is based on. Everything else is just a variation on one (or more) of those plots.
Differences between the aims of Gemini Man and Multiplicity starring Michael Keaton?
One started a broken down, pathetic, cuck that absolutle no one resoects. the other starred Michael Keaton
'the mummy' more like 'the dummy' 😂
I thought it was the 'actually Robin Hood' 'King Arthur' film when you brought up the name...
"Except maybe 2 fast 2 furious" my man meant to say tokyo drift but said a good'n smh
King Arthur: Legend of the Sword was fricken awesome and I’m bitter we never got anymore
I tried D-Box once. It gave me a headache, a neckache, and nausea. It was slightly LESS enjoyable than sitting in an airplane seat with a kid behind you kicking your chair for the whole flight, while flying through turbulence.
Tom Cruise ruined The Mummy by wanting more screen time
And Shynalan ruined it by directing it
M. Night Shyamalan did not direct or write or produce The Mummy.
Also, for an action movie, it was pretty good, I think the higher frame rate is pretty nice.
The Fast and the Furious movies have really lost touch with what the movies are suppose to be about. In my opinion, the first movie is the best and they get more stupid the further in the series. They go from regular criminal street racers in L.A just for them to end up as government agents/ superheroes. They even flew a car in space! Those movies are just dumb nowadays
All ten of them are dumb. They did get dumber as the series went on but they were all dumb.
Mortal engines was a good film
I liked Mortal Engines and John Carter. Same problem both films.
They didn't work as single films. If they worked on getting a good film 1 then work on sequels
The only actual original movies on that list are Gemini Man and Mr Payback. Which suggests originality is overrated.
Tron legacy was a success though. It wasn’t a HUGE hit but it wasn’t a flop
You know what sad about Tron. It was ahead of it's time twice!
How can you say that Tron Legacy failed, it made at least three times its budget and has grown to be a loved watch. Ues, the de-aging may not hold up, but the love from the fans has proven that to not be an issue...
King Arthur: Legend of the Sword, was not that bad. It was a decent adaptation. One of the reasons why it didn't do so well was because of its release date, as it came out when one of the BIGGEST Marvel movies came out; also because Guy Ritchie movies are an acquired taste most of the time.
Why is nobody talking about the fact that these people said Tron: Legacy was a great movie when recently they said it was bad? Everyone complained about them saying that and now no one's talking about how they love it now?