Disney lost a lot of money, to be sure, but they still make a lot of it. Which is why they continue to churn out a lot of garbage. Once audiences really recognize Disney's woke agenda and that they only depend on moviegoers for those delicious dollars, the House of Mouse will fall into bankruptcy and ruin.
This! Disney's message in Star Wars seems to be "step aside boys. Girls don't need you. You are silly ridiculous and illrelevent." No wonder the younger generation doesn't like or trust the opposite sex. You feel you're being conditioned and feminized with each succeeding movie. Princess Leia was scrappy, sassy and strong without emasculating every male character in the movie.
The 1956 "Around the World in 80 Days" with David Niven was a big hit with both critics and audiences, but it had more to do with the innovative (for the time) ultra widescreen and surround sound presentation than the content -- which was actually quite bland. By today's standards the 2004 Jackie Chan remake is *much* more entertaining.
If "CATS" has a saving grace it's that it utterly HUMILIATED Taylor Swift who expected to win and Oscar somehow or other. When cats sing and dance, Tay-Tay.
Kids in the 70s got movies like JAWS ,The Godfather , One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest, ANNIE HALL , BLAZING SADDLES and ROCKY, The only thing that excites kids today at the movies is who's playing the next Spiderman and when will Hulk fight Wolverine. Good god it's all just become so damn boring already.
When I was laid up in the hospital for more than a week, I watched a stream of super hero/comic book movies on the closed circuit television mounted above my bed. I hated every ----- one of them.
If your definition of "not as bad a disaster as some made it out to be" is a movie losing over $200 million, then I want to hire you for my public relations department. LOL.
No wonder these films went bust. They look awful. They're the reason I want to watch old classic movies, 30s, 40s,50s, 60s 70s. Movies with human beings and real stories. Modern movies are so boring.
I also find that with many contemporary movies - particularly blockbusters - I simply don’t care about the story or the characters. Is it perhaps that big budget movies have too many people sticking their fingers in the pie to have any hope of creating anything meaningful?
@trollonwiggins I did go to see it, but I expected an Indiana Jones movie that was as good as the eighties films. And I had watched the first three films leading up to seeing the new movie, so I knew what I was looking for. But I didn't find it in Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny. The magic just wasn't there
Star Wars didn't and still doesn't have "franchise fatigue" The problem was and still is Disney/Lucasfilm, with the bad writing, directing and the things they retcon.... they ended up driving a majority of the fan base away. Disney has no one to blame but themselves.
When the first Star Wars movie came out way back in 1977 I thought it was a dud and so invested in Battle Star Galactica memorabilia. Just like I bought beta video instead of VHS.
Pretty sure 20th Century Fox produced Cleopatra and it did almost bankrupt them. They had to temporarily shut down and furlough many employees but were saved by the public's fascination with Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton's off screen relationship. There are two Cleopatra movies currently in development now. One stars Gal Godot (Patty Jenkins directing) and the other one will be directed by Denis Villenueve (Zendaya might be the title role) and will probably both end up bankrupting their producing studios.
Cleo Clucker ..was so bad. Long Dull lifeless..and truly almost bankrupted..20th Century Fox! Who wrote this tripe, dribble and poorly acted..when the asp does a better job than the leads! 😜🫤🥴
I highly recommend that you DO Not see That Dreadful Rex Harrison Dr. Don’t! It is one of the worst films a complete dud of a film..lackluster and how that one of the worst films made got a Best Picture Nomination? And the film in 1972 is called The Poseidon Adventure…Produced and Co-Directed by Irwin Allen! It made tons of funds at the box office…
You made a rather odd comment about "A Wrinkle in Time". That the director was the first woman of color to direct a film with a budget of over $100 million, but that it didn't connect with audiences. Why should the gender, ethnicity or the size of the budget be of any interest to the casual film goer?
It really shouldn’t be relevant to anyone what demographic boxes someone ticks. Unfortunately, there have been many instances where box office failures are blamed on supposedly bigoted audiences. Personally I think that kind of excuse making signals to would-be movie-goers that the movie probably isn’t worth their time & money, because - in part - no one wants to be portrayed as a bad person for not finding something entertaining.
Perhaps the backlash over every movie that doesnt check all the boxes is part of the problem? Why is it ok for people to trash me and pigeonhole me as some sort of bigot if I dont like a certain movie or show (cant the Acolyte just be bad? Or does it automatically mean I'm just bigoted for thinking it's bad?), but if a video mentions how the boxes were checked and it still failed, that's bigoted too? Double standard? Either gender and race dont matter, or they do. You cant have it both ways. As far as budget, it shouldnt have any impact on the casual film goer, but for a video like this where the whole point is to illustrate movies who's budget was big and draw didnt match it seems more than relevant.
@@patriciafenwick5846 Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny 2023 Lost $326 $384 $143 $143 so yes you are soooo RIGHT consider this werewolf schooled by its betters on the subject!
We missed watching Alexander in the theater (I think we were penniless students). But we got the dvd when it came out and we loved it. Truly epic and with solid performances by Farrell, Leto and Kilmer. Hopkins forgivable for chewing scenery but no way is Jolie’s Vampira not cringeworthy. We got the Final Cut, too, and now it is one of our favorites. Cut out the 2 scenes with Farrell and Jolie and see what a terrific performance he gives. And Stone, IMO, directed that massive epic brilliantly. Battle of Guagemela and the final battle in the Indian forest are masterful. The shot of Bucephalus rearing up head to head with the elephant is absolutely stunning.
Yeah Hugo is the best of them, I think Poseidon the second best. I bought both movies and enjoy them more than many so called successes. I am a little surprised to see Hugo on the list here, for it was not that bad of a movie. I think it is better than almost all the movies I have seen come out in the last 3 to 4 years.
I saw it in the theater, 3d, and I thought it was excellent, kind of a pretty and romantic movie. It was so fun and good. I picked it at random and couldn't believe it was a Scorcese film.
The super hero genre literally died when End Game was over. What an appropriate title. Time for movies with realistic themes again and I'm here for it.
Hugo was such a beautiful movie. Not super surprised it flopped. A family movie from Scorsese is kind of bizarre out the gate. But it's pretty special.
"Dolittle" with RDJ flopped, because for me personally, this was an unnecessary remake. Even the first remake 25 years ago with Eddie Murphy I never cared to watch either. The original with Rex Harrison in the late 1960's should really be the only one to exist. I know they make remakes/reboots to update it for younger audiences, but remakes makes it as though Hollywood likes to rehash stories way too much than they should. It just feels lazy. 10/16/24
So grateful for this list which included a movie I'd been totally unaware of... Hugo. Just goes to show that a box office failure needn't be an indicator of a bad film at all. Granted, nothing would persuade me to sit through Cats or The Marvels but I got Hugo on Blu-Ray and I'm so glad I did. It's a little gem.
I loved Hugo, but I'm not sure who the target audience was going to be. Up until about 8 years ago, there was an old theater near us where you could go to opening weekend matinees for less than four dollars, so we went and saw a lot of stuff that we might not have seen if we had to pay full price. I saw a LOT of these movies, and most of the ones I have seen had the same problem - they were okay, but there was nothing to bring people back to see them again.
Any film that shoots in the UK can apply for a large tax rebate, a sweetener to entice studios here. The kicker is that said studios have to later release a publicly-accessible budget statement that details ALL their expenditures. This is why embarrassing financial details about "The Acolyte" are just now coming to light. By my own calculations, Disney lost at least $1 billion last year, perhaps as much as $1.5 billion, so YES! the possibility of them being money-launderers is not as daft as it seems.
Solo is actually really good. One of the best, if not the best, film on this list. But it came out at a time when a glut of Star Wars films had saturated the market, and it had a ridiculous budget due to producion difficulties. However, I'm impressed tha Ron Howard was able to make anything cohesive out of such a situation.
100 million here, a 100 million there, pretty soon they are talking about real money. Are movie studios in the entertainment business are in the laundering money business? I see stories like this and for some reason I think of THE PRODUCER. I have heard that Hollywood bookkeeping is not the same as any other business so I wonder are the studios really "loosing" so much money or the "loss" is just on paper and the investors are the one that loose? I don't have any inside knowledge but it does make you wonder how they can afford to lose so much and stay in business.
Most of these movies are considered flops based on just the GROSS revenue of ticket sales in their first week, and that's before the theatres and distributers have taken their cut, against not just the production costs but also the marketing costs. At that point, the studio will declare the movie a flop for tax purposes and start publicly weeping about how much money they lost. Behind the curtain, they hope the IRS doesn't notice all that money they make over the whole of the rest of the movies' theatrical run, plus streaming revenue, home media release, and eventual syndication to cable and network TV. Factor in a bunch of other, less tangible, income like merchandising licenses, product placement deals, even filming location subsidies, and your balance sheet will be covered in a lot more black ink than red.
Star power doesn't make good movies. When you have poor writing, poor directing, and poor audience targeting, it doesn't matter who stars in the film. If you want to know what went wrong with certain movies, you're better off looking at movies no one expected to do well, but did. You'll find that a story told well is more important than any other ingredient. Studios are so caught up in name power, they can't see the truth. From producers who think they no "better" than the authors of successful novels, to directors who think they're the worlds gift to movie making. Lastly, box office failure doesn't necessarily mean the film was bad. There are far too may films that did poorly in theaters but blossomed in streaming or home video release. Add to that, film critics who wouldn't know a good movie if it jumped out and bit them, and you have a recipe for disaster.
I only saw Justice League (which I didn't hate, but didn't love either) and Solo (which I genuinely enjoyed, and can only criticise for leaving so many plot threads that will now remain unresolved) in theaters.
Eight of them, and I didn't hate any of them (though I was pretty disappointed in Wrinkle in Time). Justice League, Pan, Marvels, Doolittle, Green Lantern, Solo, and Hugo, which I loved.
Who were the A-list stars in Stealth? Jamie Foxx, who I believe was third-billed, was probably the biggest star in the film, and even he hadn't had a solo hit movie outside of Ray.
You hear "superhero" fatigue tossed around but I think it's "actor" fatigue - people are sick of the same ten actors playing every role in every movie.
I didn't mind Stealth, however I thought that they may have taken some visual, and story cues from the four part anime, Macross Plus, and Sam Shepard, had the better role in Black Hawk Down. I suppose, Ali helped Will Smith prep for the Oscars. The television version of A Wrinkle In Time was better than the big budget version. They really should have made a live action Thundercats movie regarding the humanoid makeup, and they took down, Dame Judith Dench! Dame Judith Dench! That in, and of itself was atrocious. Take care, and all the best.
I didn't hate Stealth either. There are worse films on this list. But none of the film's stars were A-listers and it didn't have any real USP to draw summer audiences in. Ali is a good film, but it's not the great one it needed to be. I commend Michael Mann for insisting on using expensive African locations, but when you watch the film, that decision never feels justified. It's a rather dour movie about one of the most vivid and exciting sports-people of all time. It needed more energy and colour. I actually haven't seen Cats yet. I keep reading/hearing how awful it is, but even as a non-furry, none of the trailer images have put me off yet, and although I'm not a fan of Andrew Lloyd-Webber I'm still curious to see it (if only to finally experience how bad it actually is).
@@Sunbeard.9 Yet, DC is the property with all the awards. No, Marvel managed to achieve something grand with its Infinity Saga, thanks to Disney letting them cook. This is where WB pooped the bed and screwed DC.
With remakes too many are horrible. Leave classics alone and come up with new ideas. But obviously Hollywood writers have lost a lot of what they used to have.
$170,000,000 for Doolittle and all the other garbage? What an utter obscenity. Think you all tge real good that money could have done. Thanks for posting - this was excellent if very alarming.
Marvels losing $232 million isn’t a total disaster? Don’t forget, it’s not just $232 mil loss, it’s also loss of half a billion dollars in anticipated profits. So stock prices had to reflect shortage of $750 million from expected earnings -just from one movie
Given how often movies these days find their largest audience numbers via streaming services, I wonder if box office receipts can possibly mean what they used to. I for one am unlikely to bother paying ridiculous prices to sit in a movie theater, when I can wait a short time and watch a movie in the comfort of my own home.
I don’t know why Greece was getting upset about Alexander’s sexuality. Greece didn’t even exist as a nation at the time and besides that Alexander was also famously called Alexander of Macedon…because he was Macedonian. Also Greece has an island called Lesbos where we get the word lesbian from and lots of Ancient Greek pottery showing men having sex with men and animals. They should really have embraced it (despite Alexander not being Greek) . The original olympic games was all male and they competed nude. If you’ve ever watched Greco-Roman wrestling it’s the gayest thing you’re ever likely to see outside of a gay strip club. So kind of a Streisand effect own goal there.
@@rodmoore1577 Damn. I really should've watched it then. That would have been heterosexually worth it. They had a naked hispanic american in it (and Rosario, no less? I thought her saying ATM is sometimes ok in Clerks 2 was a historic highlight in life)? Man, that film was really all over the place in its messaging.
First off, putting the thumbnail with Henry Cavil's likeness for Man of Steel? Big wrong there. That movie was awesome, and Michael Shannon's portrayal of General Zod? Incredible!! The movie is criminally underrated. Second? Han Solo didn't fail because of "franchise fatigue." What Disney did to Han Solo was so despicable, that people gagged over the finished product. They made Han Solo, one of THE most beloved Star Wars characters into a bumbling, sopping oaf! WTF Disney? And they downplayed that Han Solo wore the bloodstripe on his trousers. In SW lore, that is only given for bravery and courage. And since at the time Han Solo was an Imperial Officer, he was said to be a model officer that rose to Captain. As for the bloodstripe? It is an execution offense on Corellia to wear it without earning it.
James Gunn's movie with a cameo by Superman among the many other Where's Waldo characters will bomb. I haven't seen nor heard anything that makes me think positively about it and I'm Superman's #1 fan.
100%. I actually prefer it to Episodes VII-IX. And it's certainly better that Episodes I and II, although as one as non-main continuity SW films go, it falls short of Rogue One.
@@k.chriscaldwell4141 Empire and New Hope are still my faves. But Rogue One is up there, alongside ROTJ. I also quite like Revenge of the Sith, even if the mood is permanently, albeit understandably, a downbeat one (whereas the other good Star Wars films tend to be more variable in tone).
Agreed. The trailers didn't help either. I'd seen Ehrenreich in several movies before he was cast, he had all the qualities that Harrison Ford had, but I was gobsmacked at how little Lando was actually in the movie considering he featured so much in the trsilers.
The problem with Solo was all the publicity was focused on Donald Glover as Lando when he hardly featured in the actual movie. Another thing I found was the casting of Erin Kellyman as Enfys Nest, she has unusual looks, but cannot act and has zero charisma, this was very clear in The Falcon and The Winter Soldier. Alden Ehrenreich was absolutely perfect as the young Han Solo and many would have liked to have seen another movie featuring him as Solo. A Wrinkle in Time was over publicised and The Marvels was, and I hate this term, too DEI, concerntrating on the colour and gender of the characters rather than making a decent story, something that is plaguing the MCU currently. Deadpool and Wolverine proves this, a movie made for an audience rather than ticking boxes for the studio.
I bought Alexander on DVD and loved it, but I had no idea when it was in theaters! I wasn't watching a lot of. network television around the year 2,000 and I still don't so that's probably how that happened!
20 films Christopher Nolan wants you to see: ruclips.net/video/_qgg7dArC1Q/видео.html
SO Disney lost a lot of money and still churns out junk. ODD.
It's even more odd when you consider they fired Lloyd Braun at ABC for spending $14m on the pilot for Lost back in 2005
OH BOOHOO FOR WOKE DISNEY...and their price gouging. I'm thinking Walt has died many times over at what HIS company has become!!!
Disney lost a lot of money, to be sure, but they still make a lot of it. Which is why they continue to churn out a lot of garbage. Once audiences really recognize Disney's woke agenda and that they only depend on moviegoers for those delicious dollars, the House of Mouse will fall into bankruptcy and ruin.
"Franchise fatigue?" Give me a break; the Last Jedi is what tanked Star Wars movies
This! Disney's message in Star Wars seems to be "step aside boys. Girls don't need you. You are silly ridiculous and illrelevent." No wonder the younger generation doesn't like or trust the opposite sex. You feel you're being conditioned and feminized with each succeeding movie. Princess Leia was scrappy, sassy and strong without emasculating every male character in the movie.
"Around the world in 80 Days" has been done before; the best being the David Niven 1956 version. Some masterpieces you leave alone.
There is a 80s tv miniseries that is also pretty good.
Too many remakes try and be too big and clever instead of keeping to the storyline of the book and/or original movie.
The 1956 "Around the World in 80 Days" with David Niven was a big hit with both critics and audiences, but it had more to do with the innovative (for the time) ultra widescreen and surround sound presentation than the content -- which was actually quite bland. By today's standards the 2004 Jackie Chan remake is *much* more entertaining.
There was a miniseries on PBS that my wife and I enjoyed. No pun intended, I think it was shown on the program was "Masterpiece."
I wonder if Elizabeth Taylor's estate had any inkling of this her being Mike Todd's widow.
She did inherit the rights to the TODD-AO film process.
I'm not surprised by half of these.........I NEVER HEARD OF THEM!!!!
When they use the phrase "Give the people what they want", they didn't mean you need to "give EVERYONE what they want in a single movie".
If "CATS" has a saving grace it's that it utterly HUMILIATED Taylor Swift who expected to win and Oscar somehow or other. When cats sing and dance, Tay-Tay.
Everyone expected The Marvel's to flop.
Yeah I did. But I am surprised to see Hugo on the list here.
Yee
For the record, I love "Hugo."
This video is great. The narration is especially well-written. QTR, I salute you.
Kids in the 70s got movies like JAWS ,The Godfather , One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest, ANNIE HALL , BLAZING SADDLES and ROCKY, The only thing that excites kids today at the movies is who's playing the next Spiderman and when will Hulk fight Wolverine. Good god it's all just become so damn boring already.
When I was laid up in the hospital for more than a week, I watched a stream of super hero/comic book movies on the closed circuit television mounted above my bed. I hated every ----- one of them.
If your definition of "not as bad a disaster as some made it out to be" is a movie losing over $200 million, then I want to hire you for my public relations department. LOL.
I still cant believe Captain Marvel raked in 1 billion at the box office
come on someone put steve carrel in a comedy and thought people would pay to watch it that in it self is comedy gold
No wonder these films went bust. They look awful. They're the reason I want to watch old classic movies, 30s, 40s,50s, 60s 70s. Movies with human beings and real stories. Modern movies are so boring.
@elizabethcsicsery-ronay1633 I bet you tell a lot of stories about yourself that end in ‘and everybody clapped’
@@Ineddiblehulk What on earth do you mean?
I also find that with many contemporary movies - particularly blockbusters - I simply don’t care about the story or the characters.
Is it perhaps that big budget movies have too many people sticking their fingers in the pie to have any hope of creating anything meaningful?
@@Ineddiblehulk Hülye komment. Megint ilyent emelnek ki mert engem támad. Nagyon gyerekesek. Ez a moderátor munkája?
@@elizabethcsicsery-ronay1633 pay no mind. The offspring of cousins hooked on meth can result in comment tragedies like his.
HEY HOLLYWOOD!! Most of us are over superhero movies, Star Wars & sequels, prequels, re-imagined IP!!!!
Thank You @northshore1000 100%
Well, Deadpool & Wolverine was the second biggest box office this year. So i guess not yet.
May I suggest Disney’s … Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny … which reportedly lost $134.2 million.
I would have added John Carter.
People went into Dial of Destiny with exaggerated expectations...I went in expecting an Indiana Jones movie and that exactly what it was...
Not a bad movie apart from the over rated Phoebe Waller Bridge.
@trollonwiggins I did go to see it, but I expected an Indiana Jones movie that was as good as the eighties films. And I had watched the first three films leading up to seeing the new movie, so I knew what I was looking for. But I didn't find it in Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny. The magic just wasn't there
Doesn't come close to Borderlands
lets be honest Solo was a film no star wars fan wanted
Star Wars didn't and still doesn't have "franchise fatigue" The problem was and still is Disney/Lucasfilm, with the bad writing, directing and the things they retcon.... they ended up driving a majority of the fan base away. Disney has no one to blame but themselves.
When the first sequel came out it seems people like it. I was one of the few who hated it and complained about blowing up yet another Death Star.
When the first Star Wars movie came out way back in 1977 I thought it was a dud and so invested in Battle Star Galactica memorabilia. Just like I bought beta video instead of VHS.
Cleopatra basically bankrupted Columbia Pictures.
Pretty sure 20th Century Fox produced Cleopatra and it did almost bankrupt them. They had to temporarily shut down and furlough many employees but were saved by the public's fascination with Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton's off screen relationship. There are two Cleopatra movies currently in development now. One stars Gal Godot (Patty Jenkins directing) and the other one will be directed by Denis Villenueve (Zendaya might be the title role) and will probably both end up bankrupting their producing studios.
@@kronos5385 Leave it alone.
Cleo Clucker ..was so bad. Long Dull lifeless..and truly almost bankrupted..20th Century Fox! Who wrote this tripe, dribble and poorly acted..when the asp does a better job than the leads! 😜🫤🥴
No it went into profit when sold to television
Maybe, but I love that film
I highly recommend the original Dr. Dolittle with Rex Harrison and S.O.S Poseidon.
I highly recommend that you DO Not see That Dreadful Rex Harrison Dr. Don’t! It is one of the worst films a complete dud of a film..lackluster and how that one of the worst films made got a Best Picture Nomination? And the film in 1972 is called The Poseidon Adventure…Produced and Co-Directed by Irwin Allen! It made tons of funds at the box office…
@@sickheadache9903 I do not agree about Dr. Dolittle
I liked the 2006 Poseidon, I thought it was a pretty good movie. And yes the original Dr. Dolittle is good. I have actually never seen the new one.
Read the book about the making of it. Insane
@@sickheadache9903 Original Poseidon Adventure in NYC Times Square cinema with the alarms going off all around the room was awesome.
You made a rather odd comment about "A Wrinkle in Time". That the director was the first woman of color to direct a film with a budget of over $100 million, but that it didn't connect with audiences. Why should the gender, ethnicity or the size of the budget be of any interest to the casual film goer?
It really shouldn’t be relevant to anyone what demographic boxes someone ticks. Unfortunately, there have been many instances where box office failures are blamed on supposedly bigoted audiences. Personally I think that kind of excuse making signals to would-be movie-goers that the movie probably isn’t worth their time & money, because - in part - no one wants to be portrayed as a bad person for not finding something entertaining.
Exactly. Completely took me out of the video for just how woke he was being
@@broghad8241 Well, at least he wasn't arguing that audiences are so racist/sexist that they were never going to watch a film made by a Black woman.
Perhaps the backlash over every movie that doesnt check all the boxes is part of the problem? Why is it ok for people to trash me and pigeonhole me as some sort of bigot if I dont like a certain movie or show (cant the Acolyte just be bad? Or does it automatically mean I'm just bigoted for thinking it's bad?), but if a video mentions how the boxes were checked and it still failed, that's bigoted too? Double standard? Either gender and race dont matter, or they do. You cant have it both ways. As far as budget, it shouldnt have any impact on the casual film goer, but for a video like this where the whole point is to illustrate movies who's budget was big and draw didnt match it seems more than relevant.
Woke Cultists will put their disingenuous trash in one way or the other.
Solo was not a case of franchise fatigue. It just happened to be the first Star Wars movie after "the last jedi"
Leave some room for Megalopolis. It belongs on this list.
I saw it an honestly couldn't tell you what it was about.
The internet said The Marvels lost about $200 Million USD so you need to check your sources. Also $200 Million is still a HUGE LOSS!
Meh, I lost that in my backyard once.
Didn't Dial of destiny's even more?
@@patriciafenwick5846 Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny 2023 Lost $326 $384 $143 $143 so yes you are soooo RIGHT consider this werewolf schooled by its betters on the subject!
Always loved when Deadpool shot Ryan Reynolds as he finished the Green Lantern script. "You're welcome, Canada!"
Big thumbs down. You left off every Disney movie since 2020. Not reputable reporting
We missed watching Alexander in the theater (I think we were penniless students). But we got the dvd when it came out and we loved it. Truly epic and with solid performances by Farrell, Leto and Kilmer. Hopkins forgivable for chewing scenery but no way is Jolie’s Vampira not cringeworthy. We got the Final Cut, too, and now it is one of our favorites. Cut out the 2 scenes with Farrell and Jolie and see what a terrific performance he gives. And Stone, IMO, directed that massive epic brilliantly. Battle of Guagemela and the final battle in the Indian forest are masterful. The shot of Bucephalus rearing up head to head with the elephant is absolutely stunning.
Well I liked Sahara.
Agreed, Sahara is great fun to watch
Yeah and Hugo and Poseidon was pretty good too I think.
It was fun.
Out of all those movies I would rank Hugo as the best.
It looked nice but it was SO boring 😫
Yeah Hugo is the best of them, I think Poseidon the second best. I bought both movies and enjoy them more than many so called successes. I am a little surprised to see Hugo on the list here, for it was not that bad of a movie. I think it is better than almost all the movies I have seen come out in the last 3 to 4 years.
Fantastic movie. Won five Academy Awards.
One of my kids favorites.
I saw it in the theater, 3d, and I thought it was excellent, kind of a pretty and romantic movie. It was so fun and good. I picked it at random and couldn't believe it was a Scorcese film.
The super hero genre literally died when End Game was over. What an appropriate title. Time for movies with realistic themes again and I'm here for it.
I don't know if Brad Pitt was "uncomfortable with voice acting" in 2003, but by 2010 he killed it in Megamind.
Hugo was such a beautiful movie. Not super surprised it flopped. A family movie from Scorsese is kind of bizarre out the gate. But it's pretty special.
"Dolittle" with RDJ flopped, because for me personally, this was an unnecessary remake. Even the first remake 25 years ago with Eddie Murphy I never cared to watch either. The original with Rex Harrison in the late 1960's should really be the only one to exist. I know they make remakes/reboots to update it for younger audiences, but remakes makes it as though Hollywood likes to rehash stories way too much than they should. It just feels lazy.
10/16/24
It isn't about a younger audience. Mel Brooks said it best - "Spaceballs 2, the search for more money"
THIS NEWS MAKE ME JUMP FOR JOY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Clash of the titans remake deserves to be on this list.
Using CGI in place of Ray Harryhausen's genius is impossible. This is why the crap Hollywood turns out today stinks...
It's not surprising to find Disney dominating this list.
I liked Hugo. Such a shame it flopped.
So grateful for this list which included a movie I'd been totally unaware of... Hugo. Just goes to show that a box office failure needn't be an indicator of a bad film at all. Granted, nothing would persuade me to sit through Cats or The Marvels but I got Hugo on Blu-Ray and I'm so glad I did. It's a little gem.
The reason why there are so many flops is actually pretty simple.
We don't like them.
Almost everyone expect The Marvels to flop.
People get sick of all these sequels and remakes and want something different and new
Weird Johnny in Alice in Wonderland is the reason it tanked. Johnny Drop curdles the milk of human kindness
I loved Hugo, but I'm not sure who the target audience was going to be.
Up until about 8 years ago, there was an old theater near us where you could go to opening weekend matinees for less than four dollars, so we went and saw a lot of stuff that we might not have seen if we had to pay full price. I saw a LOT of these movies, and most of the ones I have seen had the same problem - they were okay, but there was nothing to bring people back to see them again.
Any film that shoots in the UK can apply for a large tax rebate, a sweetener to entice studios here.
The kicker is that said studios have to later release a publicly-accessible budget statement that details ALL their expenditures. This is why embarrassing financial details about "The Acolyte" are just now coming to light.
By my own calculations, Disney lost at least $1 billion last year, perhaps as much as $1.5 billion, so YES! the possibility of them being money-launderers is not as daft as it seems.
Yeah Hugo was great.
EVERYONE expected the Marvels to fail.
From the actor's portrayal of Han Solo in the trailer, I knew it was a must NOT see movie.
Solo is actually really good. One of the best, if not the best, film on this list. But it came out at a time when a glut of Star Wars films had saturated the market, and it had a ridiculous budget due to producion difficulties. However, I'm impressed tha Ron Howard was able to make anything cohesive out of such a situation.
You are kidding right.
100 million here, a 100 million there, pretty soon they are talking about real money. Are movie studios in the entertainment business are in the laundering money business? I see stories like this and for some reason I think of THE PRODUCER. I have heard that Hollywood bookkeeping is not the same as any other business so I wonder are the studios really "loosing" so much money or the "loss" is just on paper and the investors are the one that loose? I don't have any inside knowledge but it does make you wonder how they can afford to lose so much and stay in business.
Most of these movies are considered flops based on just the GROSS revenue of ticket sales in their first week, and that's before the theatres and distributers have taken their cut, against not just the production costs but also the marketing costs. At that point, the studio will declare the movie a flop for tax purposes and start publicly weeping about how much money they lost. Behind the curtain, they hope the IRS doesn't notice all that money they make over the whole of the rest of the movies' theatrical run, plus streaming revenue, home media release, and eventual syndication to cable and network TV. Factor in a bunch of other, less tangible, income like merchandising licenses, product placement deals, even filming location subsidies, and your balance sheet will be covered in a lot more black ink than red.
losing. Why can't anyone spell losing or lose
Green Lantern was a Great movie! Why it didn't do better is beyond comprehension!
Hugo was a fantastic film. My kids, nieces and nephews absolutely love it when we watch it. Poor marketing was the culprit.
Johnny Depp would have made a better Dr. DoLittle.
Too bad that "Hugo" tanked. It's a lovely film, highly recommend.
Star power doesn't make good movies. When you have poor writing, poor directing, and poor audience targeting, it doesn't matter who stars in the film. If you want to know what went wrong with certain movies, you're better off looking at movies no one expected to do well, but did. You'll find that a story told well is more important than any other ingredient. Studios are so caught up in name power, they can't see the truth. From producers who think they no "better" than the authors of successful novels, to directors who think they're the worlds gift to movie making. Lastly, box office failure doesn't necessarily mean the film was bad. There are far too may films that did poorly in theaters but blossomed in streaming or home video release. Add to that, film critics who wouldn't know a good movie if it jumped out and bit them, and you have a recipe for disaster.
Hugo is a great movie
Nobody expected the Marvels to break 400M. They shouldve limited the budget to $133 for side characters
I saw five of these flops in theaters - won't say which ones.
I only saw Justice League (which I didn't hate, but didn't love either) and Solo (which I genuinely enjoyed, and can only criticise for leaving so many plot threads that will now remain unresolved) in theaters.
Eight of them, and I didn't hate any of them (though I was pretty disappointed in Wrinkle in Time). Justice League, Pan, Marvels, Doolittle, Green Lantern, Solo, and Hugo, which I loved.
I liked Hugo, Poseidon and Sahara.
🤯 didn't know that bout ali!😮
I've never even heard of most of these movies.
woke goes broke
🙄
I don’t consider any film I have watched and enjoyed a “waste of money” by the makers. Main stream approval isn’t everything.
This guy's attempt at puns flop even worse than all of these movies combined.
Solo was a good movie compared to Last Jedi and Rise of Skywalker.
As was Rogue 1.
Who were the A-list stars in Stealth? Jamie Foxx, who I believe was third-billed, was probably the biggest star in the film, and even he hadn't had a solo hit movie outside of Ray.
I've never even heard of it before this video.
Jessica Biel and Josh Lucas were both hot property at the time
I liked Sahara. Still one of my favorite films.
When you don’t have a good script and story people aren’t interested
You hear "superhero" fatigue tossed around but I think it's "actor" fatigue - people are sick of the same ten actors playing every role in every movie.
I didn't mind Stealth, however I thought that they may have taken some visual, and story cues from the four part anime, Macross Plus, and Sam Shepard, had the better role in Black Hawk Down.
I suppose, Ali helped Will Smith prep for the Oscars.
The television version of A Wrinkle In Time was better than the big budget version.
They really should have made a live action Thundercats movie regarding the humanoid makeup, and they took down, Dame Judith Dench! Dame Judith Dench! That in, and of itself was atrocious.
Take care, and all the best.
I didn't hate Stealth either. There are worse films on this list. But none of the film's stars were A-listers and it didn't have any real USP to draw summer audiences in.
Ali is a good film, but it's not the great one it needed to be. I commend Michael Mann for insisting on using expensive African locations, but when you watch the film, that decision never feels justified. It's a rather dour movie about one of the most vivid and exciting sports-people of all time. It needed more energy and colour.
I actually haven't seen Cats yet. I keep reading/hearing how awful it is, but even as a non-furry, none of the trailer images have put me off yet, and although I'm not a fan of Andrew Lloyd-Webber I'm still curious to see it (if only to finally experience how bad it actually is).
Marvel movies are ridiculous.
Better than DC movies, and that's not saying much.
@@Sunbeard.9 Yet, DC is the property with all the awards. No, Marvel managed to achieve something grand with its Infinity Saga, thanks to Disney letting them cook. This is where WB pooped the bed and screwed DC.
Yep, not my cup of tea that is for sure.
For the love of GOD, _enough_ with these cheesy _superhero_ movies!!! 😖😖😖🤦♂️
NO ONE??!! I knew the marvels would die horribly and I dont even keep up with movie gossip.
Idc what anyone says. I liked green lantern a lot. So much I bought myself a copy
With remakes too many are horrible. Leave classics alone and come up with new ideas. But obviously Hollywood writers have lost a lot of what they used to have.
Cats was horrible
"Hugo" was a great film.
$170,000,000 for Doolittle and all the other garbage? What an utter obscenity. Think you all tge real good that money could have done. Thanks for posting - this was excellent if very alarming.
Marvels losing $232 million isn’t a total disaster? Don’t forget, it’s not just $232 mil loss, it’s also loss of half a billion dollars in anticipated profits. So stock prices had to reflect shortage of $750 million from expected earnings -just from one movie
I expected The Marvels, Justice League, and Solo to flop.
So did I. Nice to see we weren't disappointed, eh?
The BFG is a very strange movie 🤔
Given how often movies these days find their largest audience numbers via streaming services, I wonder if box office receipts can possibly mean what they used to. I for one am unlikely to bother paying ridiculous prices to sit in a movie theater, when I can wait a short time and watch a movie in the comfort of my own home.
I loved Stealth.
All of those movies I wouldn't watch even if they were "free with ads"..
If I'm hired to direct a film I really am honestly not very comfortable if the budget is 100 million or more.
The thumbnail, Hahahaha!!!
People are suffering from CGI fatigue.
Ali was totally boring.
Arthur was just a plain stupid generic phantasy movie
I agree. But Hugo was not bad in my opinion.
"Cats" the play was so awful, my parents walked out.
I don’t know why Greece was getting upset about Alexander’s sexuality. Greece didn’t even exist as a nation at the time and besides that Alexander was also famously called Alexander of Macedon…because he was Macedonian. Also Greece has an island called Lesbos where we get the word lesbian from and lots of Ancient Greek pottery showing men having sex with men and animals. They should really have embraced it (despite Alexander not being Greek) . The original olympic games was all male and they competed nude. If you’ve ever watched Greco-Roman wrestling it’s the gayest thing you’re ever likely to see outside of a gay strip club. So kind of a Streisand effect own goal there.
The only thing good about Alexander was Rosario Dawson naked!🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@rodmoore1577 Damn. I really should've watched it then. That would have been heterosexually worth it. They had a naked hispanic american in it (and Rosario, no less? I thought her saying ATM is sometimes ok in Clerks 2 was a historic highlight in life)? Man, that film was really all over the place in its messaging.
First off, putting the thumbnail with Henry Cavil's likeness for Man of Steel? Big wrong there. That movie was awesome, and Michael Shannon's portrayal of General Zod? Incredible!! The movie is criminally underrated.
Second? Han Solo didn't fail because of "franchise fatigue." What Disney did to Han Solo was so despicable, that people gagged over the finished product. They made Han Solo, one of THE most beloved Star Wars characters into a bumbling, sopping oaf! WTF Disney? And they downplayed that Han Solo wore the bloodstripe on his trousers. In SW lore, that is only given for bravery and courage. And since at the time Han Solo was an Imperial Officer, he was said to be a model officer that rose to Captain. As for the bloodstripe? It is an execution offense on Corellia to wear it without earning it.
King Arthur biggest problem was it was boring
Not the Antoine Fuqua film with Clive Owen, that was a great film!
Nah I expected all of those to flop, you can pretty much tell by the trailers if they are worth the watch and most aren't
Honestly I loved Sahara and King Arthur..
Captain Marvel sequel could’ve been a hit if it was just her, Fury and Goose against the villains.
James Gunn's movie with a cameo by Superman among the many other Where's Waldo characters will bomb. I haven't seen nor heard anything that makes me think positively about it and I'm Superman's #1 fan.
Joker 2🤔
Solo was good. Not great, but good. Underrated.
100%. I actually prefer it to Episodes VII-IX. And it's certainly better that Episodes I and II, although as one as non-main continuity SW films go, it falls short of Rogue One.
@@GregOrCreg Yeah. Rogue One is superb. Only second in my book to New Hope. Strikes Back and Return are great, too.
@@k.chriscaldwell4141 Empire and New Hope are still my faves. But Rogue One is up there, alongside ROTJ. I also quite like Revenge of the Sith, even if the mood is permanently, albeit understandably, a downbeat one (whereas the other good Star Wars films tend to be more variable in tone).
Agreed. The trailers didn't help either. I'd seen Ehrenreich in several movies before he was cast, he had all the qualities that Harrison Ford had, but I was gobsmacked at how little Lando was actually in the movie considering he featured so much in the trsilers.
I agree and i enjoyed this movie.
The world needs, demands tropic thunder 2.
10:55 That's exactly what would be happened when you let dogs people making a cats movie, that just dumb 😂
Plot twist: Andrew Webber's coping dog was a talking dog 11:30
I think you can Add TROY TO THIS SHOW LIST ! THE SEAGE AT TROY LASTED 12 YEARS NOT 12 MINUTES OR MONTHS ?.
The problem with Solo was all the publicity was focused on Donald Glover as Lando when he hardly featured in the actual movie. Another thing I found was the casting of Erin Kellyman as Enfys Nest, she has unusual looks, but cannot act and has zero charisma, this was very clear in The Falcon and The Winter Soldier. Alden Ehrenreich was absolutely perfect as the young Han Solo and many would have liked to have seen another movie featuring him as Solo.
A Wrinkle in Time was over publicised and The Marvels was, and I hate this term, too DEI, concerntrating on the colour and gender of the characters rather than making a decent story, something that is plaguing the MCU currently. Deadpool and Wolverine proves this, a movie made for an audience rather than ticking boxes for the studio.
King Arthur was supposed to have been a kid when he pulled out the sword, wasn't he? Young teen? Not a thirty year old.
I bought Alexander on DVD and loved it, but I had no idea when it was in theaters! I wasn't watching a lot of. network television around the year 2,000 and I still don't so that's probably how that happened!
Mostly I noticed people download and stream things nowadays. We need to change things, how they are marketed.