13 Movie Bombs That Actually Deserved Their Box Office Death
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2024
- Some movies crash and burn at the box office, and it's not always a mystery why. Sometimes, a film is so off the mark that its failure is almost inevitable. Here are 13 infamous movie bombs that truly earned their dismal fates.
You might also like:
10 Box Office Bombs That Are Actually Worth Watching
• 10 Box Office Bombs Th...
10 R-Rated Box Office Bombs That Are Secretly Masterpieces
• 10 R-Rated Box Office ...
Don't forget to like, subscribe, and hit that bell icon for more TV & movie magic.
#boxoffice #movieflops #boxofficebombs #DCEU #XMen
John Carter wasn’t that bad, the rest are indeed awfull
Yes it was.
@@chrissalem3747No it wasn't!!
...I watched about 10% of these movies, because it was obvious that the other 90% were gonna suck big time... and they did... that 10% sucked too, but not as spectacularly as the 90% I didn't watch... and John Carter wasn't bad at all... wasn't the best movie I've ever watched, but good enough to have watched it at least 5 times since... I really don't understand the bad rap it gets, though...
@@themoviebay yes. It was
@@chrissalem3747 no it wasn't
John Carter is such a head scratcher to me because it was actually a really good film.
Agreed. Disney just didn’t know how to market it.
The weird thing is The Lone Ranger became one one of Quentin Tarantino's favorite westerns and John Carter failed because Disney wouldn't acknowledge the creator Edgar Rice Burroughs, failed to use the proper title, John Carter of Mars, and pretty much dropped the ball in marketing the film properly.
They tanked John Carter because D was able to buy Star Wars close to the time that it was entering post production and they didn’t want to split focus between two sci-fi properties.
Yeah, "John Carter" sounds like a boring biopic about some boring politician.
@bored1ca You jumped topics; Edgar Rice Burroughs was _John Carter of Mars,_ while _The Lone Ranger_ (as well as _The Green_ 𝘏𝘰𝘳𝘯𝘦𝘵) was created by Fran Striker.
I liked John Carter, Don't care what Critics say never did.
@@stevenjones1171 I know that's right...the person know what they like don't need so-called critics
John Carter started off great, but in the second half, it wandered away from the source material while trying to cram in elements of Burroughs' second book, the God's Of Mars. Filmmakers just can't seem to resist screwing with ERB's stories to their own detriment. John Carter should have been the epic start to a 10+ film franchise.
On a minor note, I wish they had followed painter Michael Whelan's depiction on Woola. It captured the spirit of the hideous, ferocious calot with a heart of gold perfectly. 😊
@@user-ol2so9ce2q That and also the weird PR did the movie no good. It's a shame, because the concept did have potential.
@@user-ol2so9ce2qI can only hope to see a book accurate Dejha Thoris someday ( maybe a more adult future version)
If you're a fan of the character then you enjoyed the movie if you hadn't read the books then you were totally lost.
John Carter was a very good film. A few years ago I found out it developed a cult following among wargamers. The books of Edgar Rice Burroughs have been ‘rediscovered’ and the film John Carter is required viewing as wargamers develop strategies to wargame Barsoom in conventions. Fingers crossed that time will remember John Carter more favorably.
Yeah, I'd remove John Carter. Add Batman and Robin, Ishtar... and Leonard Part Six.(that HORRIBLE Bill Cosby movie)
agree. plus gulliver's travels. awful!
Batman and Robin made money despite being a bad movie.
@@bobbywilliams2839 Yeah, go figure.
I was expecting to see Leonard Pt 6😂
Add Cutthroat Island to the mix. It buried Carolco Pictures.
John Carter was a fantastic movie that deserved a much better fate. Bad marketing, not word-of-mouth, killed it. I defy anyone who has seen it to tell me that they didn't enjoy it.
John Carter was a case of the studio having no idea what to do with a movie, so they just sent it out to die.
You could make a case that John Carter's box office failure sent the house of mouse into a decade of "sure bets only," thereby helping to usher in this plastic era of superhero movies, sequels, reboots, and reboots of superhero movie sequels.
Travolta chewing the scenery like there is no tomorrow makes Battlefield Earth a guilty pleasure, the movie ist awful but the Travolta scenes are unintentionally hilarious
Definitely a guilty pleasure like Showgirls
I loved john Carter...but not many are at all familier with the Barsoom books.
I did too. I wish they re-arranged the beginning, like show his wife's death, then get transported to Mars and such and then we can see it was all in his journal at the end.
The original story, 'A Princess of Mars', had enough action for 4 movies. I like the books and the movie. I think that the movie improved on Dejah Thoris. In the books she isn't much more than a damsel in distress / sexy McGuffin. The film Dejah was a more serious character and the actress had a good comic touch.
You quote rotten tomatoes like that means a fucking damn...
To be fair, L Ron Hubbard was at best, a hack sci-fi writer who turned "religious" grifter. And for the record, the best Fantastic Four movie is the Incredibles.
In Ron Hubbard's era they were all hacks. They just had to write so much so fast, quality sort of went out the window.
@@glenchapman3899 Bollocks. It was the era of classic science fiction.
@davidhoward4715 no. The majority of his work appeared in the pulp era. He was producing upwards off 100,000 words a month across a number of genres from 1932 to 1940. The Golden age of science fiction began in July 1939
The crazy thing is that the plot of his hack book actually made more sense than the movie.
@@petemccutchen3266 Not going to lie. I think you are the first person I have ever heard who has read the book lol
The John Carter movie was ruined by Hollyweird because they didn’t stick to the original story.
Done correctly the Martian chronicles of Edgar Rice Burroughs could have become a movie series.
The Martian Chronicles were written by Ray Bradbury. If you're going to rant about "Hollyweird", at least get your facts right.
I’d swap out John Carter with Mortal Engines,now that movie is the most ridiculous brain fart that should have never got past the “Ooo what’s this book about 🤔..the world’s resources are depleted but we’ve made cities have wheels and they drive around chomping up other cities…now that’s bullshit not even a two year old with learning difficulties could enjoy” stage!
I checked it out...briefly. I thought the premise could have been interesting but it was just unwatchable and kept fast forwarding until about the halfway point then questioned why was still trying to watch it.
They had Cities on wheels AND Hugo Weaving and yet they somehow managed to screw it up!
One important reason IMO is that the main good guys were not cast properly and did not deliver anything close to good performance.
@@kostastube2010 it’s the whole cites on wheels bs that had me get get the fook outta here. It’s a premise that’s totally ridiculous and could only really work as part of a Monty Python type skit as they did in the meaning of life where they had building moving around
Try reading the book series as opposed to relying on movies
@@davehoaen8268 I’ve read many Edgar Rice Burroughs novels. I’m personally favourite is Pellucidar which i own a first edition of
What on Earth happened to audio in the section about Gigli? Did you forget to add the voiceover? Play them back before you upload them man. Sheesh.
Ah, so it wasn't just my system?
@@brunozeigerts6379Nope. It was messed up on mine too.
I first thought it was meant to be intentionally humorous, as in "So bad I don't need to tell you", or like that. But then wondered if the comments triggered some RUclips algorithm? Not sure... but that was weird.
Thank you! I thought something was wrong with my cellphone!
Just plugged in and plugged out my headphones. Thought it was my phone. Not just me then.
Cats was an absolute mess....😱😱😱
There was nothing wrong with Cats. The musical was a major Broadway hit. People were complaining about things in the movie that were the same as the musical. People just read other comments and piled on.
@@michaelsangster2354 Please between the corny plot & nightmare inducing CG, Hellen Keller would cringe.
@jaygarcia8508 it's the exact same plot as the Tony award winning Broadway play. The CGI is no worse than the spandex, fur, and fake tails worn by the actors on stage. The biggest problem with Cats was that people went thinking they were going to see a Disney cartoon.
@@michaelsangster2354 the plot sucked then & it sucks now 🤣🤣🤣🤣😹
The cutsie self importance of the stage musical made many of us Cats haters, the movie just bore out this silliness even more...
Barry Pepper won the Golden Raspberry Award for Battlefield Earth and said that he would've gladly accepted the award in person if he'd known about it.
Apart from its abysmal "marketing" campaign, one major problem with _John Carter_ was forgetting the _Of Mars_ part of the title. The proper name on its own was meaningless. When I heard it I had to wonder, "Do they mean _John Carter of Mars,_ of the Edgar Rice Burroughs book series?"
I enjoyed the film (I still want my own Woola), already aware _Star Wars, Attack of the Clones_ had ripped off the gladiatoresque amphitheater aspect.
I liked the John Carter movie, having read the Edgar Rice Burroughs stories as a child. I guess "modern" kids and adults may not have had that experience.
Where is "Ishtar" (always remember Barry Norman's review) and "Showgirls".
Aww, come on.. Ishtar was cute
Or "Heaven's Gate"?
@@rossanderson4440 Not seen Heavens Gate not seen Ishtar Either, unfortunately have seen Showgirls!
Showgirls was a great "Spank the Monkey" movie...
Carter was excellent - but screwed by a lack of commitment by the studio to properly market
John Carter was a great film. I think it seemed unoriginal to people because the books have inspired sci-fi and fantasy for almost a century. I think the books are worthy of being PROPERLY adapted into a tv series.
your pick of John Carter is tone deaf. the marketing was a fail, the movie is a valid action movie who's story created most of the tropes in action movies.
"...created most of the tropes in action movies..." That's actually a big part of the problem. The John Carter stories _did_ create them, but they created them in 1912 and people had forgotten the character. I liked the film, but everyone was saying it was too derivative and unoriginal. Similarly, I can recall a conversation with a friend where I was trying to point out that the 1982 _Conan_ film had created and popularised a new film genre. He maintained that he'd seen it and it just seemed like a "typical" 80s fantasy movie to him. Unfortunately, you don't get credit for being the first in today's world....
I saw it in the theaters (my wife loved the books and her explanations helped when she informed me the movie blended books). My only real issue with the movie was what I call "the Transformers Effect". The actions scenes had too little visual differentiation other than a little bit of blue vs. a little bit of red. I had no clue what the hell was going on in the early floaty shippy battle scene thing. Other than that it had a decent cast (but poor Taylor Kitsch CANNOT catch a break) and a decent story. Funny, exciting and romantic in parts.
Wow, Gigli is so bad even the AI doesn't want to talk about it.
Well at least you had the good sense NOT to include HOWARD THE DUCK.
Epic movie…xx😂
@@susanlansdell863 Oui, but you do realize, mon cheri, that it's us two against The World !
This is the only reason I came to the comments looking for someone to make a comment about this blockbuster revolutionary game changing movie that came out. Thank you for being that person lol
@@kyeskyy Mt Life's Work is to bring Sweetness and Life. It appears that you have been so graced. 💋
You guys need to fix that shitty AI voiceover, btw.
Battlefield Earth was so bad that I laughed my ass off for the whole film. They were trying so hard to be serious and it came across as anything but that. I have never had so much fun watching such a stupid movie.
Plus with all the material in the novel it should have been a mini- series!! Read the book first and loved it. You can't condense a 1050 page book into 1 movie no matter how long under maybe 6 hours and expect the movie to be good, let alone leave out a significant amount of details!!!
Maybe an unpopular opinion, but I kinda feel Wonder Woman 1984 showcased what an overrated hack Patty Jenkins was. After being lauded as such a visionary for the first film despite repeated insistence most of that film's success was entirely due to Snyder laying the groundwork and narrative, it pretty much proved she had almost nothing to offer and her ranting and raving after it bombed may well have gotten her somewhat blacklisted in the industry with numerous projects quietly put on hiatus.
Absolutely.
GMAFB! Snyder's the overrated one.
WW 84 pretty much killed Jenkins Star Wars movie project. That was too bad. A film based on an X-wing squadron would have been fun.
@@shannonterry4863 it wouldn't. It would've been butchered by her.
Carter is Excellent. Time will proove it so.
Thank you.
1. Any movie released in 2020, like WW 1984, needs an asterisk when discussing the box office. Theater receipts went off the cliff. The early months of 2021 should be included, also.
2. Please note, the Fanastic Four movie had much studio interference. It still deserves be on this list.
John Carter was fire ………. I was waiting on part two
Once again, AI voice ruins names. Also your script needs work in some spots.
Green Lantern was not a bad movie. I'm a huge comic book fan, and I enjoyed it. It wasn't perfect, but it was enjoyable.
I like it too.😊
@@donnamcmanus7360 Every woman I've ever known named Donna, is always highly intelligent, and remarkably beautiful. I have no doubt you're the exact same. God bless you and your husband. ✝️❤️
Hated it. Guy travels across the Universe to meet alien Green Lantern peers who are just a bunch of cliched Americans. My favourites being the gritty 'Sgt Buford T Butthead' one. Only thing missing was a stogie.
The villain lantern a snotty Establishment one time preppy.
@@stephenbingham5935 who cares if you hated it?
@@homeaccount5943 From the fact that it is in a list of bombs I'd say quite a few.
I don't think Wonder Woman 1984 is as bad as people like to pretend it is.
I didn't laugh once watching Pluto Nash.
I'm pretty sure that anyone who liked Battlefield Earth must have been a Scientologist.
I quite liked John Carter, and I didn't dislike The Lone Ranger and Green Lantern. Other than that, yeah, the rest were pretty atrocious.
I am enjoyed The Lone Ranger, I don’t think I deserved to fail.
"Battlefield Earth" (2000)
"Dark Phoenix" (2019)
"Wonder Woman 1984" (2020)
"The Adventures of Pluto Nash" (2002)
"Cats" (2019)
"Dolittle" (2020)
"Gigli" (2003)
"The Lone Ranger" (2013)
"Catwoman" (2004)
"Green Lantern" (2011)
"John Carter" (2012)
"Mars Needs Moms" (2011)
"Fantastic Four" (2015)
Crash and any Tyler Perry movie
TY for saving me time!
@@linda10989 Other RUclips movie reviewers, like "Terry Talks Movies" provide title/year/time stamps or video links. Others do not. When a movie reviewer talks about "old" movies, I put out "breadcrumbs" so others will have an index. A hold over about footnotes from my college days...;)
The lesson for Hollywood is: stop spending obscene amounts of money on production and marketing and you might have a hope of making your money back.
Get creative instead!
Jon Carter might have made more if the costumes had been book-accurate, but that would have changed the rating, and Disney was the wrong company to do that.
The problem is too many movies and not enough quality content to fill them with.
John Carter was one of the most pretty good movies I've ever seen.
2012. Legally Blonde 2. All Beverly Hills Cop sequels. All Jaws sequels. 1942. Treasure Island. Look Who's Talking Too. Cowboys vs Aliens. Lincoln Vampire Hunter. Van Helsing. Flyboys. Total Recall remake.
How did Battlefield Earth earn that much money
Every Scientologist had to watch it multiple times ... 😉
John Carter did NOT deserve to flop.
I liked Wonder Woman 84. I really don't get why people hate it.
One that you didn't mention: Foodfight. Sixty five million dollar budget, and it made just over seventy five thousand. The reasons as to why are worth a google.
A major factor in people disliking it, that they will never mention in a video like this, is that basically Wonder Woman was stealing an innocent man's body and molesting him....
@@_XR40_That part
John Carter was a great movie (and quite respectful to the source material) and SHOULD have been huge. Unfortunately all concerned in it’s making seem to agree that it died because Disney had no idea how to market it. As for the critics…some critics are fair but the vast majority know nothing and hop from bandwagon to bandwagon in an effort to stay relevant…but you get more thorough, thoughtful critiques and praise on platforms like RUclips these days so tabloid critics are steadily becoming an irrelevance. That being said, movies like “Battlefield Earth”, “Cats” and “Doolittle” deserved to sink, without question.
It's kinda sad that Martin Brest left the directing after his fail with Gigli. He was a pretty good director.
Midnight Run is one my favorite movies of the 80s. Sad Gigli just broke him!
John Carter was good
I saw Battlefield Earth at the theater in Grand Island, Nebraska, on Memorial Day, 2000. The theater was nice and cool. It was hot out.
What about the extensive Eddie Murphy catalog of his bombed movies? "The Adventures of Pluto Nash", "Harlem Nights", "Norbit", or "Meet Dave"?
Oh yes, "Battlefield Earth's" bizarre camera angles... when I left the cinema, I couldn't shake the feeling that I had to walk ten degrees off the vertical.
Us oldies got used to the feeling through watching the original Batman TV series ... 😂
You can't talk about films that got 3% and 53% in the same way. They both may have fail but critic scores are notoriously subjective and many hits have bad critical scores.
In fact I'd go as far as to say a bad critical score can actually promote films these days as they tend to be very narrow minded and selective to the point if ignorance. Professional critics don't even hold to a personal standard, they flip-flop between which ever studio is treating them well...
Most misses are down to promotional failures, they refuse to invest in advertising because they're already convinced it's not going to do well, and they don't want to throw good money after bad... Pluto Bash for example had been and gone before anyone knew it existed.
Mars Needs Moms should have been live action, it was predestined to Flop as an animated film, it discourages adult acceptance of it, and no parent wants to sit through it, but put Charlize Theron in it and you'd be surprised who'd sit through it with the kids...
I didn't even know Fantastic Four 2015 even existed - even now, that tells you where the problem is. No promotion or not enough. It's hardly judgement on the film if no one knows it exists, it's judgement on those who released it.
I wouldn’t be using Rotten Tomatoes for proof of a good or bad movie/show. They gave the Acolyte over 80% and that was epitome of terrible all around. In fact I would watch any movie on this list 100 million times before even considering watching that; with exceptions to dark phoenix and fan4stic, I was at least somewhat entertained by the movies on the list.
So you don't trust Rotten Tomatoes because it doesn't align with your personal tastes.
I tell people that Battlefield Earth is a relatively good movie. The book is over 1000 pages and wastes several days of your life reading it, the movie only wastes about 2 hours of your life so relative to the book it is great.
Don't care about Rotten Tomatoes...I might be the only one but I liked Dark Phonix
I had zero problems with it too. Glad to find someone else who didn’t automatically jump on the dumbass hater bandwagon.
@@aysada Thanks, fanboys.
I actually blame Mars Needs Moms for John Carter's failure. After MNM bombed, Disney didn't want to title the movie "John Carter of Mars" as it should have. I still think that would have helped quite a bit (also, I will defend John Carter any day, lol).
6:20 What happened to the audio for Gigli (pronounced G-lee)? Dont you review your video before posting it? For once, I'd like to hear the plot of that movie. But not enough to look it up.
It sounds like the only real *financial* bomb on this list is Pluto Nash. The measure should be how much did it make, regardless of "marketing costs".
They simulated my losing of interest in story they were trying to summarize.
I assumed it was on purpose.
Dark Phoenix was 100% unnecessary.
Talking about all these movies that made a financial loss, even Avatar, Titanic and a whole bunch of massively successful films made a loss regardless of how much they grossed. It's an accounting rort run by the studios' to limit their tax bills and screw actors, producers, writers and others out of the full amount of residuals they are rightly owed in the future.
Even AI can't handle gigli. We have a wepon against Skynet!
After seeing the Foxtel movie catalogue for 14 years I feel there is room for many hundreds more to be added. Not necessarily box office flops. Just awful rubbish.
I really ENJOYED "The Lone Ranger" and "The Green Lantern"! They may have been a bit different but the acting was good.
I am more irritated with gigantic epic overpriced overhyped movies that put zero effort into plot or characters than I am with the low budget generic shit movies.
And at this point I think about 3/4 of the Marvel films qualify, whether they are part of the official MCU or not.
Stop the presses! You forgot Kevin Costner's costly cowboy-and-indians flop HORIZON 1. Better luck next time when it's on TV.
You do know there were movies made before 2000, right?
You can ignore Rotten Tomatoes scores. They give 90%+ to garbage and lowball good movies. A brilliant, groundbreaking movie like Dark City gets 76% while exploitative trash like Wakanda Forever received 84% - they give anything a higher score if it's about privileged "oppressed" groups.
I never use rotten tomatoes. Generally go with imdb consensus.
Rotton tomatoes is just a place where reviewers go to have the review viewed globally. The same reviewers that reviewed dark city are not same that reviewed wakanda. And the problem with thiumbs up or down makes it easy to go up or down I wish they did a grade. Yahoo movies was great cause it went from f to a. Plus if you look at fan scores they are also higher than dark city. I love dark city but must admit the final battle was to much cgi and wierd
Dude seek professional help.
All this John Carter support is hilarious 😂
Why? It really wasn't bad.
I never saw John Carter, but always thought Carter was played by Keanu Reeves! He looks just like him, to me. I do want to watch it though... I keep hearing it is actually really good.
I wasn't expecting so much support for John Carter - the only movie listed that I enjoyed - I just came to say that the narrator's crack "proving that some risks aren't worth taking" is really just lazy thinking, especially for a movie that basically broke even.
Obviously, it was imperfect, and surely the investors were looking for blockbuster returns, not breaking even, but hindsight is 20/20, my dude.
Knock "Wonder Woman '84" off the list and replace it with "Madame Web" and I won't think it's BS
"John Carter" may be a film that the next generation may rediscover, especially if it is re-released with its original and stronger title, "John Carter of Mars". General consensus is that Disney purposefully sabotaged the marketing of "John Carter", even by giving the film its bland title. Apparently, there was a power struggle occurring within the Disney Corporation. Some executives didn't want "John Carter" to succeed despite the investment. Corporate was about to acquire the "Star Wars" franchise and decided it didn't want a competing action-adventure-SciFi franchise. Incredibly, Disney started trashing its own movie and it became fashionable for critics to pile on.
The one thing all these movies have in common is they are a great way too kill a rainy day as long as you have some weed and snacks.
Dam you did my movie Gigli dirty! You couldn't even muster up the energy to speak at a normal volume and tone!
Compared to The Lone Ranger, a broccoli fart doesn't really smell that bad.
There are a Lot of other flops out there than John Carter, Green Lantern or MNW. Both JC and GL did their jobs as fantasy and comic-based films. Awful were Mortal Instruments, Mortal Engines and the Poseidon reboot.
Wonder Woman came out when covid was still around and it streamed at the same time. The box office could have been a lot higher if not for streaming plus you have to include how many people signed up for HBOMAX streaming services.
After earth,
Wild wild west.
Smith apologized for the latter😂
Lol I always forget Lois Griffin was in Catwoman
I blame Disney for ruining John Carter because it was an extremely entertaining movie and I thought it was very visually appealing . It's far and away better than any current Disney garbage, that's for sure.
And then there's Fan4stic. Dear lord, what a dumpster fire and I don't think Disney is going to redeem it with the new one.
This makes no sense. If it was extremely entertaining, why are you criticizing Disney? For making such a good movie?
@@davidhoward4715 Blundered marketing, lousy promotion, not getting the full title of "John Carter of Mars," etc. Try to keep up.
John Carter was a disaster behind the scenes. I liked the movie so I read up a lot on it. I might have some details off but I'm pretty sure this is the general idea of what happened.
-John Carter came out after Mars Needs Moms bombed, and the lesson Disney executives learned from MNM bombing was that you shouldn't put Mars in the title of a movie. Keep in mind though that John Carter is based on a book called Princess of Mars. So they weren't going to call it Princess of Mars because they thought that would turn away a male audience because of "princess" and "Mars" was forbidden to use in the title, which also counted out calling it John Carter of Mars. So they went with the extremely generic John Carter.
-The director was considered a golden child who could do no wrong based on his success with Pixar leading up to the movie. So he was essentially given a blank check to make John Carter by a particular Disney executive who was on his way out. But the director was used to making CGI movies, not live action, and he went by his CGI movie process.
This created at least two major problems during the production of the movie. There was a point where marketing contacted production for scenes to use for trailers, but at the time nothing exciting was available to hook people, so they had to go with the mundane scenes that were available.
The director also had to redo a lot of scenes. Which in his Pixar production method wasn't that costly, but in live action that was incredibly expensive. So the production budget started to climb, but as he was still considered a golden child, he wasn't being told no. But other executives were noticing the problems with the movie.
-Then the executive that basically gave the director the blank check left Disney, so the top advocate for the director was gone when it came down to marketing the movie. And back in 2012, Disney seems to have felt like they could HEAVILY promote either John Carter OR The Avengers, and I think we all know what movie they picked to market and which one was left in the dust.
This is a very interesting info, thank you for sharing the details!
Most of these films DID actually deserve their box office death...but JOHN CARTER was not one of them. Taylor Kitch did a great job ( as he did in Wolverine: Origins playing Gambit) along with the rest of the cast. Disney seriously messed up and dropped the ball on marketing, with no support-leaving it in the box office desert to die an ignoble death.
GREEN LANTERN was another bomb that had great potential, some fabulous casting, especially Sinestro and the Green Lantern Corp, and great off planet scenes, but was ultimately brought down by a lame script, poor casting and a ridiculous visual portrayal of Hector Hammond, who cheapened the whole film and dragged it down into mediocrity.
As far as DARK PHOENIX stands, I genuinely enjoyed the majority of actors that were cast for the 1st & 2nd X-Men First Class reboots. Their 3rd outing fightingt Apocalypse, which attempted to add the glaringly missing members-Storm, Cyclops, Angel and Jean Grey (though strangely, no Gambit)-was somewhat of a casting faux pas, particularly Sophie Turner as Jean. She seemed to have been chosen solely for her "it girl" popularity status from being in Game of Thrones. But I hung in there and overall did enjoy the rest of the cast and the story.
So then DARK PHOENIX was announced as the next X-Men movie, with all of the First Class cast returning...YES! I was really looking forward to a great script, having been a fan of the whole Phoenix arc. Even with my hopes dashed of finding out there'd STILL be no Gambit, I was at least excited to see they were adding Dazzler to the lineup, as well as having Jessica Chastain in it, who is an awesome actor.
Yes, it had a weak script, but I'm sorry to say it also cemented the opinion that Turner was SO wrong for the part.. Her persona and performance just tanked whatever possibility there was for saving it ( as a poor script can be be somewhat raised up and elevated by great acting ).
Based on ur comments here, I am convinced that u do not understand that only about 50% of the gross revenue is delivered back to the studio.
Who cares what critics think?
0:29 While you were still learning how to SPELL YOUR NAME!!!!! I was being trained…to conquer GALAXIES!!!!!”
Ummm
Let’s not forget “The Green Hornet” with Seth Rogen.
A truly horrible film!
I just wanted to see which movies were on the list. I liked Catwoman.
If anything, I would have made a list of movies that should have been box office bombs, and mine would've included a lot of superhero movies, mostly from the MCU.
Water world should be here. One of the worst movies I've ever been subjected to. Costner's inflated ego is really on display here.
What about Ghostbusters 2016 that a movie should never been made.
While we are knocking productions, what's with the volume during your Gigli critique?
How could you possibly leave out water world!!?? I was expecting that to be number one.
I walked out of John Carter quite dissatisfied. It felt like the studio had started with an adventure script, but didn't trust it. So they added in kid stuff like the Martian babies in hope it would become an adventure family movie.
I liked the Green Lantern movie. No, it wasn't spectacularly great - but it wasn't terrible. It stuck to the comics origin reasonably well. As to the John Carter movie, it was mostly close to the original story by Edgar Rice Burroughs in some parts. I enjoyed it as a decent if not great movie.
This entire video was a backdoor teaser for the upcoming 'Fantastic Four' 2025.
Which cast? The people from the 2015 movie (🤮), or the cast from the original first 2 (2005 and 2007 👍)?
@@CookyMonzta I don't know. I didn't know there was going to be another FF movie before watching this video. But just off the top of my head, I doubt Chris Evans will be reprising his role as Johnny Storm.
As long as Hollywood keeps putting people who know nothing about comic books in charge of making comic book superhero movies, those movies will continue to suck.
Soooo, you just couldn't locate an actual human being to narrate this?!
I saw John Carter twice and loved it. (Ahh, Lynn Collins.) "Take up a cause, fall in love, write a book." How often do you get to take away that much from a movie?
Green Lantern really did suck!
And it’s such a shame because he is AWESOME as Deadpool!!!
I guess the script does make a huge difference
I really liked Battlefield Earth. Don't give a rats arse what anyone says...and I liked John Carter and Fantastic 4 too....