The dark humor of The Cable Guy was great. While I don't know anyone who liked "Batman and Robin" or "Waterworld", I don't know anyone who did not like The Cable Guy.
Problem with lists like that is that in the budget of a movie marketing costs normally are not integrated. And these aren't low (as you can imagine). It is said you can take around 1/3 of the official budget and add it to all the costs, maybe even more. And so these lists are losing much of their accuracy.
I never thought Cable Guy was a flop. I was a teen and everybody I knew loved it at the time. Not until RUclips decades later that I found out that some people weren’t too fond of it 🤷♂️
It was the 4th highest grossing movie june 1996. Just under the rock, mission impossible, and twister. The studio must have had really high hope cause I wouldn’t consider that a bomb at all.
The biggest problem with Eragon was that it didn’t follow its source material. Many critical elements of the book were either changed or ignored altogether. To me, Eragon and The Last Airbender are prime examples of Hollywood sh*tting on fans while trying to capitalize on a beloved source. Like many video game movies, book adaptations typically never live up to the hype
Does the source material for "Eragon" note that the word "eragon" is just the word "dragon" with the first letter changed to the next letter in the alphabet? Are the sequels titled "Fragon", "Gragon", and "Hragon"? 😂
@@ninkorndokken Reading the book for you may give you some additional depth to the story. It won’t ruin it, but it will explain some things that the movie totally disregarded
I loved Waterworld! it was different! Loved the setting too. It wasn't too many special effects which made it, for me, more believable! I know if that did that today it would have so much CGI that I think it would ruin it
Plus, studios take a small (if China, zero) percentage of international box office. Plus, for domestic, the percentage is staggered from opening weekend till closing weekend. So a movie with legs makes more money for cinemas than it does for studios.
As the oldest nerd here, actually saw Last Action Hero in theatre. It was SO far ahead of it's time, no one knew what to make of it. I've loved it since that first time it popped into fourteen year old eyes.
Guaranteed I’m older and Last Action Hero was a painful watch! Like most Arnold movies! As a kid I loved him! Commando, Predator, Running Man, they were awesome! But like Dukes of Hazzard and the A Team watching them as an adult almost ruined my childhood!
@@patrickkirkham and Jurrassic world is worse than Jurassic park but it still was the 3rd and now is the 8th highest grossing movie of all time this is not about comparing sequels to predecessors, this is about movies people assumed failed at the box office but didnt
To me it was a total failure except for the ending, which I thought was quite original. The rest was a parody on the other 2 movies, combined with some pretty bad acting by 'John Connor en girlfriend "(I dont even remember their names). An d the female terminator was just a gimmick to not have a TOTAL copy of the first two movies (you know: terminator comes to nowadays, trying to kill John in one way or another before he becomes the leader of the resistance. AGAIN).
@@valetboy21 So financially it was not a flop at the boxoffice. But that s the thing: you cant judge a movie this way. For me a good movie is a movie with a gripping story, good acting etc. Genisys SUCKED for it was all a rehash, no originality. I tried to watch it several times and each time i fell asleep at about 2/3 of the movie. Same part every time... So to me its a bad movie. But some think its a good movie cause a lot of people went to go see it. But they dont show how many people left the theatre disappointed.
I’m not sure who made this list but making more than the budget in theaters doesn’t mean instant profit, the studios get only about 50%, give or take of that money, for example, total recall remake mad 198 million world wide, on a 125 million budget, they did not break even and in fact lost 25 mill without even adding in advertisement cost.
Yes, the theaters get the lion's share in the first few weeks. Plus overseas numbers are a lot less profitable than domestic. The "general" rule used to be anything over twice the budget would push you into profit. 100m budget would need 200+ mil to start profiting.
The movie theaters are dropping like flies. Any privately owned were pressed to switched to digital, too expensive. Now lots of the big chains are folding.
The general rule when figuring out if a movie is profitable is to take the shooting budget and double it to account for the marketing and distribution costs (which you completely ignored). When you do that, most of these movies actually were flops.
I loved Waterworld! it was different! Loved the setting too. It wasn't too many special effects which made it, for me, more believable! I know if that did that today it would have so much CGI that I think it would ruin it
They could have added Pacific Rim to this list. The movie flopped huge in the United States but was a box office juggernaut in China, Japan, Korea, and southeast Asia. In fact, the movie was made primarily to accommodate the Asian movie markets, with the main action being centered in Hong Kong even though the evil aliens had attacked the entire earth. This led to a few movies aimed at Asian distribution including Skyscraper, Alita: Battle Angel, and the John Wick series.
There were two REALLY GOOD movies on this list that I could never figure out why they got so much hate from critics or the specialized press: The Last Action Hero, and; Prince of Persia, Sands of Time. I remember watching both of them in theaters on their respective release dates and loving them. The Last Action Hero I've watched countless times and it is a guaranteed fun watch.
I don't think you know how money works. GROSS is not NET income. The studio takes about 60% of the domestic box office and about 40% or less of the foreign box office. It averages out to 50%. So if a movie has a budget of $50m, spends $25m on marketing, they need to make about $150m at the theaters to break even. Now obviously they get extra streaming deals so it's not quite that dire for them, bit they still make the vast majority of their income from the box office.
Last Action Hero was perceived as a flop because it made the grave mistake of going to head-to-head on opening weekend with Jurassic Park and got completely trounced. LAH still made money but nowhere near as much, though it probably would have grossed a lot more if it hadn't tried to directly compete with Spielberg's box office juggernaut. As the story goes, this was all the result of an intense personal rivalry one the heads of Columbia Pictures had with one of the higher-ups at Universal. Real Les-Grossman-in-Tropic-Thunder kinda sh*t.
Most of these were absolutely box office flops. They are only counting against the budget when you also have to account for marketing, theater cut, distribution costs...etc. In general, a movie must make a minimum of twice the production budget to even break even.
To be considered a sucess, a movie needs to gross at least 2-3 times its budget. Clearing 50 million above the stated budget of 85 million in the case of the Last Action Hero makes it a flop
Movie studios don’t own the movie theaters, so a movie with a production budget needs to do way more than the budget to not lose money due to a sharing of revenue with theater owners. Typical in the USA revenues are split roughly in half, foreign markets pay less.
I wish I hadn't read Eragon before going to watch the movie. I went with a couple people who hadn't read it, one thought it was ok, the other liked it. I had to hold my tongue so I didn't ruin the entire thing for them. Worst movie I've ever watched in a theater. And since then I try to keep my expectations as low as possible, especially when it comes to adaptations of books I've read. IT is the only movie adaptation in recent years where I wasn't disappointed afterwards. I read the entire book over the week leading up to the theater release of the first movie, so I went in with everything fresh in my mind. Nothing can be a perfect adaptation, but it was well done.
Total Recall's $198mil net on a $120mill budget means that the movie lost about $50mil because the studio only gets half the net box office and then you have to add on marketing costs on top of that.
Your math is off. You said Last Action Hero's worldwide gross is $137 million against a budget of $85 million? Numbers like those, I assume you're looking at Boxofficemojo? Anyway, from that $137 million, 36.4% is from the US and 63.6% is from international box office. Okay, so studios have to split with the theaters. In the US, this is usually 50-50, but for a movie like Last Action, I bet the deal was 60-40 favoring the studio. Internationally, the split is 20-40% for the studio, but for the sake of argument, let's say it's 40% worldwide. Do the math: 36.4% of 137 million is $49.9 million (that's US gross) and 87.1% of 137 million is 87.1 million (international gross). Sixty percent of US gross (49.9 million) is around $30 million domestic, and 40% of international gross (87.1 million) is $34.9 million. Total of US and international is going to be $64.8 million, it's a $20 million loss. But wait! It doesn't end there! Most MARKETING BUDGETS are around 50% of the production budget, so the studio spent around 42.5 million on promoting Last Action Hero, but I'll bet since its' Schwarzenegger, they spent another 85 million, not just 42.5 million. So the movie is a BIG bust, not just an earnings disappointment.
Eragon should serve as a shining example of what happens when you adapt something in name only. But several years later we still have crap adaptations like Wheel of Time, Cowboy Bebop, and The Witcher from season 2 on.
Mark Kermode reckons that for a film to be considered a box office success it needs to make twice its budget back at the box office, and that in general it's really hard for a movie to actually flop these days, because even if the movie is bad, that becomes an "event" that draws people to go see it to see how much it sucks...and decent movies that didn't fare well at the box office tend to do well on video/dvd/blu-ray sales....I'm looking at you, Waterworld...
Batman and Robin disappointed because people were still pining over the Burton movies. At it's heart it is pure schlock and it knows it. It is the ascetetics of the Burton films with the zaniness of the West show.
I actually really liked Battleship, it was bombastic, visually impressive, with minimal story that really didn’t matter, and was fun to watch. It’s not winning any awards sure, but I don’t think it’s terrible.
I love water world movie such a great 90’s movie. Would like too see a new one can’t go wrong with a good action movie and think it would work well now.
That's not how box office works. 50% bo goes to theatre, 50% to studio. So if you want to know if any movie is a success or not, just check whether the BO is 2.5x of the budget. (Considering marketing, international share)
I quite liked Prince of Persia.... if you go to these films expecting a pop-corn feast and no strong story or Oscar Nominations - the film is a joy to watch.
The issue with this video is they are not taking into account at the theater makes 50 to 60% of those box office numbers so yes these movies were actual flops in the theater
Lost in Space-- 1998 i think ??? i actually loved this flick MOSTLY... the ending is a bit off the rails.. well, about 10-15 before that, really.. with "Old Will" Robinson, looking like a homeless wretch too stupid to realize Dr Smith is a Spider Creature for,.. a decade or two ?? but genius enough to build a time machine.. that bit was.. hard to swallow..as was the actor chosen to be "Old Will ".. all other parts, i really enjoyed, and wished a sequel came out..
You should change the title to, “movies that took 20 years to make money”, or “movies that flopped in the US, but were bailed out by china”. Most of those movies bombed hard at the US box office.
Last Action Hero cost 85 mill... it made 137... that IS a flop. A film NEEDS to make at least twice its budget to garner a profit. And that was one of the biggest promoted films of the year. It absolutely was a flop. Virtually ALL of these movies that are big budget films that didnt make 2-2.5 times are... funny you seem to retcon your statement by suggesting it couldve lost more smh
So a movie is a flop when it profits 30 to 150 million? wow. I hate the word flop so much. It's absolutely worthless with how widely and indiscriminately it is used. So dumb
Til: WhatCulture have no idea how movie finances work. Home video?? Are you serious? That's a mere blip for most big budget films. Maybe a huge streaming deal but other than that physical media wouldn't pay for catering on most movies.
Eragon was the absolute worst book-to-movie adaptation ever made, and by a wide margin. The only reason it made money was because most of the viewing audience never read the books. 75% of the book wasn't in the movie. 75% of the move wasn't in the book. Completely unnecessary changes were made with no reason or gain. Main characters were not even present at all. And the ending prevented the second book from ever being made into a movie as a sequel. It was so bad, it literally ended the career of the director, who has no credits to his name since then. If Thanos was real, I would ask him to snap it out of existence.
Waterworld wasn't that bad. Although I hated the Costner vs hopper scene at the end when hopper is screaming at Costner and he just speaks very quietly. I doubt hopper could actually here what Costner said. Ai ending just made me go why did I watch this.
I'm sure you've done a video before about these movies that flopped that were actually very good. Now your saying they didn't flop ... which is it? Are you just struggling for content?
A.I. simply does not belong in any list of flops I think. Maybe it wasnt for everyone and maybe the revenance wasnt quite enough. But I always thought it was a one of a kind movie with a masterclass acting by Hayley Joel Osment and Jude Law. Stunning VFX and a great storyline. But it also drags on a little too much. When you have the rest in your body to watch a somewhat slower paced scifi movie with a real good story: I would say give it a chance!
“Last Action Hero” and “The Cable Guy” were two movies that was way ahead of their time. I love them in the 90s, I love them now
The dark humor of The Cable Guy was great. While I don't know anyone who liked "Batman and Robin" or "Waterworld", I don't know anyone who did not like The Cable Guy.
“Dry land is not a myth! I’ve seen it!”
Stiller has 4-5 great movies he’s directed.
Problem with lists like that is that in the budget of a movie marketing costs normally are not integrated. And these aren't low (as you can imagine). It is said you can take around 1/3 of the official budget and add it to all the costs, maybe even more. And so these lists are losing much of their accuracy.
I never thought Cable Guy was a flop. I was a teen and everybody I knew loved it at the time. Not until RUclips decades later that I found out that some people weren’t too fond of it 🤷♂️
Same its one of my favorite Jim Carrey movies
Same and with the last action heroI love that movie
Same... Who thought it was a flop??
It was the 4th highest grossing movie june 1996. Just under the rock, mission impossible, and twister. The studio must have had really high hope cause I wouldn’t consider that a bomb at all.
Salt peanuts, salt peanuts! That was my favorite scene and my friends thought I was crazy because I used to randomly start saying it.
The biggest problem with Eragon was that it didn’t follow its source material. Many critical elements of the book were either changed or ignored altogether. To me, Eragon and The Last Airbender are prime examples of Hollywood sh*tting on fans while trying to capitalize on a beloved source. Like many video game movies, book adaptations typically never live up to the hype
Does the source material for "Eragon" note that the word "eragon" is just the word "dragon" with the first letter changed to the next letter in the alphabet? Are the sequels titled "Fragon", "Gragon", and "Hragon"? 😂
@@johnclavis Read the book and find out 😉
I enjoyed the whole series of books. But movie was so underwhelming
I never read the books but I did love the movie I thought it was awesome I don't go by I don't go to the theaters
@@ninkorndokken Reading the book for you may give you some additional depth to the story. It won’t ruin it, but it will explain some things that the movie totally disregarded
Waterworld wasnt actually a bad film, it was like Mad Max at sea
Wasn't a particularly good film either, unlike Mad Max, it was just a bit middling.
Ummmmm
I loved Waterworld! it was different! Loved the setting too. It wasn't too many special effects which made it, for me, more believable! I know if that did that today it would have so much CGI that I think it would ruin it
I believe conventional wisdom is that a movie needs to make double it's production budget to break even due to marketing and other costs.
Plus, studios take a small (if China, zero) percentage of international box office. Plus, for domestic, the percentage is staggered from opening weekend till closing weekend. So a movie with legs makes more money for cinemas than it does for studios.
As the oldest nerd here, actually saw Last Action Hero in theatre. It was SO far ahead of it's time, no one knew what to make of it. I've loved it since that first time it popped into fourteen year old eyes.
Guaranteed I’m older and Last Action Hero was a painful watch! Like most Arnold movies! As a kid I loved him! Commando, Predator, Running Man, they were awesome! But like Dukes of Hazzard and the A Team watching them as an adult almost ruined my childhood!
It was meta before being meta was cool or “a thing “ loved it
Everyone thinks terminator 3 was a failure but it was the last successful one in the franchise.
@@patrickkirkham and Jurrassic world is worse than Jurassic park but it still was the 3rd and now is the 8th highest grossing movie of all time
this is not about comparing sequels to predecessors, this is about movies people assumed failed at the box office but didnt
To me it was a total failure except for the ending, which I thought was quite original. The rest was a parody on the other 2 movies, combined with some pretty bad acting by 'John Connor en girlfriend "(I dont even remember their names). An d the female terminator was just a gimmick to not have a TOTAL copy of the first two movies (you know: terminator comes to nowadays, trying to kill John in one way or another before he becomes the leader of the resistance. AGAIN).
@@mrroboshadow Thats not what the title says. Plus it depends on what you think is a failure.
@@valetboy21 So financially it was not a flop at the boxoffice. But that s the thing: you cant judge a movie this way. For me a good movie is a movie with a gripping story, good acting etc. Genisys SUCKED for it was all a rehash, no originality. I tried to watch it several times and each time i fell asleep at about 2/3 of the movie. Same part every time...
So to me its a bad movie. But some think its a good movie cause a lot of people went to go see it. But they dont show how many people left the theatre disappointed.
I’m not sure who made this list but making more than the budget in theaters doesn’t mean instant profit, the studios get only about 50%, give or take of that money, for example, total recall remake mad 198 million world wide, on a 125 million budget, they did not break even and in fact lost 25 mill without even adding in advertisement cost.
Yeah, I was confused by this list. These movies sound like flops
Remember, the movie studio doesn't get ALL of the gross. A large percentage of the gross goes to the theatre! (35-50% I believe).
Yes, the theaters get the lion's share in the first few weeks. Plus overseas numbers are a lot less profitable than domestic.
The "general" rule used to be anything over twice the budget would push you into profit. 100m budget would need 200+ mil to start profiting.
Yea his accounting skills are way off lol
The movie theaters are dropping like flies. Any privately owned were pressed to switched to digital, too expensive. Now lots of the big chains are folding.
The general rule when figuring out if a movie is profitable is to take the shooting budget and double it to account for the marketing and distribution costs (which you completely ignored). When you do that, most of these movies actually were flops.
Plus, commercially successful films can definitely still be critical flops.
He does actually. He mentions it after every movie.
@@jordantarrant9611 only marketing costs are mentioned.
0:50 I've watched *Last Action Hero* so many times yet I didn't even realise the T-1000 made an appearance in it
Omg! Good catch! What a cool Easter egg! 😎
Cable guy was my favorite movie growing up, I watched the VHS about a hundred times!
Yeah Me Too😁🇬🇧👍🏻
me too! 😂😂😂
Last Action Hero is legit one of my favorite movies ever. Its so good.
Prince Of Persia was a pretty damn good film, and actually reminded me a lot of the Tomb Raider films, it's a shame it was so badly rated overall.
I loved Waterworld! it was different! Loved the setting too. It wasn't too many special effects which made it, for me, more believable! I know if that did that today it would have so much CGI that I think it would ruin it
Being released around the same time as Jurassic Park, at least in the U.S., probably didn’t help Last Action Hero very much either.
They could have added Pacific Rim to this list. The movie flopped huge in the United States but was a box office juggernaut in China, Japan, Korea, and southeast Asia. In fact, the movie was made primarily to accommodate the Asian movie markets, with the main action being centered in Hong Kong even though the evil aliens had attacked the entire earth. This led to a few movies aimed at Asian distribution including Skyscraper, Alita: Battle Angel, and the John Wick series.
You just said it should be on the list, then literally explained exactly why it’s not on the list.
🤷🏻♂️
Trying to tie the movie Battleship to the board game was always kind of a weird premise, still it's not a bad movie at all.
A very recent one, I feel like a lot of people weren't fans of but it did good, was Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness.
There were two REALLY GOOD movies on this list that I could never figure out why they got so much hate from critics or the specialized press: The Last Action Hero, and; Prince of Persia, Sands of Time.
I remember watching both of them in theaters on their respective release dates and loving them. The Last Action Hero I've watched countless times and it is a guaranteed fun watch.
Aye!
Water World was a great f*cking movie and I loved it since I saw it in the theater when it came out.
I don't think you know how money works. GROSS is not NET income. The studio takes about 60% of the domestic box office and about 40% or less of the foreign box office. It averages out to 50%. So if a movie has a budget of $50m, spends $25m on marketing, they need to make about $150m at the theaters to break even. Now obviously they get extra streaming deals so it's not quite that dire for them, bit they still make the vast majority of their income from the box office.
Last Action Hero was perceived as a flop because it made the grave mistake of going to head-to-head on opening weekend with Jurassic Park and got completely trounced. LAH still made money but nowhere near as much, though it probably would have grossed a lot more if it hadn't tried to directly compete with Spielberg's box office juggernaut.
As the story goes, this was all the result of an intense personal rivalry one the heads of Columbia Pictures had with one of the higher-ups at Universal. Real Les-Grossman-in-Tropic-Thunder kinda sh*t.
Most of these were absolutely box office flops. They are only counting against the budget when you also have to account for marketing, theater cut, distribution costs...etc. In general, a movie must make a minimum of twice the production budget to even break even.
Last action hero was one of my favorite movies as a kid, watched it atleast once a week
Not a Movie But Son Of The Beach Loved That show the reruns on Spike TV had high ratings at the time
To be considered a sucess, a movie needs to gross at least 2-3 times its budget. Clearing 50 million above the stated budget of 85 million in the case of the Last Action Hero makes it a flop
I have never known a person to actually judge movies based on "box office" results.
Movie studios don’t own the movie theaters, so a movie with a production budget needs to do way more than the budget to not lose money due to a sharing of revenue with theater owners. Typical in the USA revenues are split roughly in half, foreign markets pay less.
I liked half of these movies. Even with cheesy scripts, Last Action Hero/Batman and Robin/Eragon are all movies I really enjoy.
I wish I hadn't read Eragon before going to watch the movie. I went with a couple people who hadn't read it, one thought it was ok, the other liked it. I had to hold my tongue so I didn't ruin the entire thing for them. Worst movie I've ever watched in a theater. And since then I try to keep my expectations as low as possible, especially when it comes to adaptations of books I've read.
IT is the only movie adaptation in recent years where I wasn't disappointed afterwards. I read the entire book over the week leading up to the theater release of the first movie, so I went in with everything fresh in my mind. Nothing can be a perfect adaptation, but it was well done.
Batman and Robin was a hit amongst kids in the 90s
Total Recall's $198mil net on a $120mill budget means that the movie lost about $50mil because the studio only gets half the net box office and then you have to add on marketing costs on top of that.
I love the “Total Recall” remake. It reminds me of Mass Effect with its production design and atmosphere.
I can see why most folks think A.I. is a flop, but it’s still one of those movies that can be a pop culture types.
Mister Freeze was a worse villain than we give credit for. It was so cold in Gotham, we got Batnips.
Your math is off. You said Last Action Hero's worldwide gross is $137 million against a budget of $85 million?
Numbers like those, I assume you're looking at Boxofficemojo? Anyway, from that $137 million, 36.4% is from the US and 63.6% is from international box office.
Okay, so studios have to split with the theaters. In the US, this is usually 50-50, but for a movie like Last Action, I bet the deal was 60-40 favoring the studio. Internationally, the split is 20-40% for the studio, but for the sake of argument, let's say it's 40% worldwide.
Do the math: 36.4% of 137 million is $49.9 million (that's US gross) and 87.1% of 137 million is 87.1 million (international gross).
Sixty percent of US gross (49.9 million) is around $30 million domestic, and 40% of international gross (87.1 million) is $34.9 million. Total of US and international is going to be $64.8 million, it's a $20 million loss.
But wait! It doesn't end there! Most MARKETING BUDGETS are around 50% of the production budget, so the studio spent around 42.5 million on promoting Last Action Hero, but I'll bet since its' Schwarzenegger, they spent another 85 million, not just 42.5 million. So the movie is a BIG bust, not just an earnings disappointment.
For a rule of thumb estimate of a movie's break even point, multiply the budget by 2.5. THAT's the LEAST a movie has to make to break even.
Eragon should serve as a shining example of what happens when you adapt something in name only. But several years later we still have crap adaptations like Wheel of Time, Cowboy Bebop, and The Witcher from season 2 on.
I know of one film that makes " Waterworld" look good, "Judge Dredd"( ful )!
Mark Kermode reckons that for a film to be considered a box office success it needs to make twice its budget back at the box office, and that in general it's really hard for a movie to actually flop these days, because even if the movie is bad, that becomes an "event" that draws people to go see it to see how much it sucks...and decent movies that didn't fare well at the box office tend to do well on video/dvd/blu-ray sales....I'm looking at you, Waterworld...
It's actually 3X the money
Ghost Rider is fun. Light years better than crap like Independence Day and Titanic.
Batman and Robin disappointed because people were still pining over the Burton movies.
At it's heart it is pure schlock and it knows it. It is the ascetetics of the Burton films with the zaniness of the West show.
I actually really liked Battleship, it was bombastic, visually impressive, with minimal story that really didn’t matter, and was fun to watch. It’s not winning any awards sure, but I don’t think it’s terrible.
Same. I also love how they say "military fetishism" like it's not named after a board game that's literally based on and centered around naval combat.
I love water world movie such a great 90’s movie. Would like too see a new one can’t go wrong with a good action movie and think it would work well now.
That's not how box office works. 50% bo goes to theatre, 50% to studio. So if you want to know if any movie is a success or not, just check whether the BO is 2.5x of the budget. (Considering marketing, international share)
I unironically love most of these movies.
Most movies need to double their budget in order to not be called a flop.
I loved cable guy and last action hero… I knew some people didn’t like cable guy but never thought that it bombed
I quite liked Prince of Persia.... if you go to these films expecting a pop-corn feast and no strong story or Oscar Nominations - the film is a joy to watch.
The issue with this video is they are not taking into account at the theater makes 50 to 60% of those box office numbers so yes these movies were actual flops in the theater
How do you know? You psychic.
Lost in Space-- 1998 i think ??? i actually loved this flick MOSTLY... the ending is a bit off the rails.. well, about 10-15 before that, really.. with "Old Will" Robinson, looking like a homeless wretch too stupid to realize Dr Smith is a Spider Creature for,.. a decade or two ?? but genius enough to build a time machine.. that bit was.. hard to swallow..as was the actor chosen to be "Old Will "..
all other parts, i really enjoyed, and wished a sequel came out..
Golden Compass too
Shouldn't include fake movies in your list. There is no Eragon movie, and I refuse to accept otherwise.
I always really liked Water World, and I still quote Cable Guy. lol
Okay, okay, I admit it. I am one of the people who made Eragon not quite a flop. (I'm blaming my ex, though. She's the one who wanted to see it.)
Are these budgets including the marketing?
No I looked it up to make sure.
You should change the title to, “movies that took 20 years to make money”, or “movies that flopped in the US, but were bailed out by china”. Most of those movies bombed hard at the US box office.
I shelled out to see Ghost Rider 2 and still love it when the Rider is on the screen
Last Action Hero cost 85 mill... it made 137... that IS a flop. A film NEEDS to make at least twice its budget to garner a profit. And that was one of the biggest promoted films of the year. It absolutely was a flop. Virtually ALL of these movies that are big budget films that didnt make 2-2.5 times are... funny you seem to retcon your statement by suggesting it couldve lost more smh
the Golden Compass made a ton of money everywhere except the United States.
When I was young I watched Last Action Heronat least 4 times, so good!
Waterworld was an obvious copy of the Mad Max trilogy, but with water instead of Australia.
I like all these movies. Great entertainment.
Dude...I LOVE Waterworld 🤷♀️
I was a kid when last action hero came out and I love that movie and had the action figure
Cable Guy is an incredible film.
So a movie is a flop when it profits 30 to 150 million? wow. I hate the word flop so much. It's absolutely worthless with how widely and indiscriminately it is used. So dumb
......so Waterworld *was* a flop.....like..... 🤨
Til: WhatCulture have no idea how movie finances work.
Home video?? Are you serious? That's a mere blip for most big budget films. Maybe a huge streaming deal but other than that physical media wouldn't pay for catering on most movies.
I read all the Eragon books. They where so much better than the movie.
Eragon was the absolute worst book-to-movie adaptation ever made, and by a wide margin.
The only reason it made money was because most of the viewing audience never read the books.
75% of the book wasn't in the movie.
75% of the move wasn't in the book.
Completely unnecessary changes were made with no reason or gain.
Main characters were not even present at all.
And the ending prevented the second book from ever being made into a movie as a sequel.
It was so bad, it literally ended the career of the director, who has no credits to his name since then.
If Thanos was real, I would ask him to snap it out of existence.
Dude last action hero is a fantastic movie
Waterworld wasn't that bad. Although I hated the Costner vs hopper scene at the end when hopper is screaming at Costner and he just speaks very quietly. I doubt hopper could actually here what Costner said.
Ai ending just made me go why did I watch this.
Very few films actually fail to (eventually) turn a profit. It’s why bombs become so well known.
I remember watch AI as a kid in the theater and everyone love it.
I would add Superman Returns to that list
I'm sure you've done a video before about these movies that flopped that were actually very good. Now your saying they didn't flop ... which is it?
Are you just struggling for content?
Minus last action hero this list could be “crappy movies that made money.”
A.I. simply does not belong in any list of flops I think. Maybe it wasnt for everyone and maybe the revenance wasnt quite enough. But I always thought it was a one of a kind movie with a masterclass acting by Hayley Joel Osment and Jude Law. Stunning VFX and a great storyline. But it also drags on a little too much. When you have the rest in your body to watch a somewhat slower paced scifi movie with a real good story: I would say give it a chance!
I love this movie
It's kind of a masterpiece
He literally explained why it’s on the list.
to break even a film must make at least double its costs.
I hope we get a reboot of eragon all four of theose books where really good. And if done right it could be damn good
I am sure I am the only one who liked ghost rider 2. That is because I grew up with that movie.
Waterworld was a heater
I think the PG-13 rating has hurt lots of action movies.
I thought the rule of thumb was to double production budget for advertising. So if this is true, they are all flops.
Eragon was a complete failure cause it didn't follow the book at all! Same thing happened with Percy Jackson.
Eragon the novel was great as were it’s sequels. Even more amazing when you consider that the author was 15 when he wrote it. The movie sucked though
How about (subjectively?) good movies that were financial flops?
Wait what? They made a sequel to Ghost Rider?
That thumbnale is mad
I actually like the total recall remake
There were people who watched the Total Recall remake?
I’ll meet one eventually.
i like spirits of vengance, actually own it........
Man, you really should have rehearsed pronouncing "Schwarzenegger" before recording.
have still not watched total recall
This list Stockholm syndromed me into watching it. I had to watch it to finally get it off my feed. 😒🙄
I love the cable guy
[ remember liking Eragon maybe it was for Robert Caryle
Eragon still stings 😭