Biggest box office bombs of 2009 (as of now)

[QUOTE="spawnassasin"]

[QUOTE="Hallenbeck77"] I'd just wish he'd make movies for adults again instead of constantly collecting paychecks from family flicks.II_Seraphim_II

to true

Well all actors care about the paycheck to be fair, Murphy just seems to choose bad films more often. Also Nicholas Cage was in a really good film this year.

[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"]All the movie theaters I go to have cell jammers, so no tweets there :PMrGeezer

So at most, negative word of mouth gets delayed by a whole three hours?

[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"][QUOTE="spawnassasin"]

to true

Film-Guy

Well all actors care about the paycheck to be fair, Murphy just seems to choose bad films more often. Also Nicholas Cage was in a really good film this year.

[QUOTE="Film-Guy"]

[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"] Eddie Murphy is the black Nick Cage. If there's money , he's on it! He doesn't care about the art anymore, he just cares about the paycheck. II_Seraphim_II

Well all actors care about the paycheck to be fair, Murphy just seems to choose bad films more often. Also Nicholas Cage was in a really good film this year.

Cage and Murphy do seem to get crap more often, so I understand what you are saying. However I still recommend you see Bad Lieutenant: Port of call new orleans. It is better than the original, and Nicholas Cage is nuts in it. Think of it more as a dark comedy. I dont know if it is playing in many theaters though.

[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"][QUOTE="Film-Guy"]

Well all actors care about the paycheck to be fair, Murphy just seems to choose bad films more often. Also Nicholas Cage was in a really good film this year.

Film-Guy

Cage and Murphy do seem to get crap more often, so I understand what you are saying. However I still recommend you see Bad Lieutenant: Port of call new orleans. It is better than the original, and Nicholas Cage is nuts in it. Think of it more as a dark comedy. I dont know if it is playing in many theaters though.

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"]All the movie theaters I go to have cell jammers, so no tweets there :PII_Seraphim_II

So at most, negative word of mouth gets delayed by a whole three hours?

Funny thing...earlier today I saw a thread on the OT board, in which someone was complaining about professional reviewers. Things rambled on for a little bit, sort of went off on a tangent about whether the professional reviews on Rotten Tomatoes were better off than the user reviews on IMDB.

Decision wasn't unanimous, but the concensus (at least HERE, at that particular time) was that "professional reviewers" are all snooty know-it-alls who merely like to hate everything that's popular. And that if you want the best reviews, you read user reviews which are made by people who have absolutely no experience in art criticism.

That's not a definitive and scientific result, but I think that that attitude is something that has to be taken into consideration when you're making such a ridiculously expensive movie. Critics can rave all they want, but is that going to matter to the dude who thinks that "professional critics" are all just stuck-up blowhards anyway?

You and I prefer professional reviews over the opinions of Johnny Noobsauce, but the thing is that a LOT of people have the total opposite attitude. They trust their uneducated friends, and don't give one flying fart about the opinion of someone who earns a LIVING criticising movies. How MANY people think like that? I don't know. But if the recent TV spots are any indication, there are probably enough of them to be a major factor in how Fox markets the movie. Johnny Noobsauce COULD cause this movie to bomb, if there are enough people who think like Johnny Noobsauce.

Of course, that's being generous and assuming that the movie really is a masterpiece. For all I know, it might actually suck.

[QUOTE="Film-Guy"]

[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"] I agree that all actors care about their paychecks, but you've gotta know your status too. I don't see Brad Pitt acting in a bonafide bomb. Why? Because he knows he can command better roles. Eddie Murphy and Nick Cage, on the other hand, have no concept of self worth. They will act in anything that comes their way, and per chance, something good comes their way every now and then. Basically they are showbiz prostitutes, and like prostitutes, every now and then you get a high profile client. :PII_Seraphim_II

Cage and Murphy do seem to get crap more often, so I understand what you are saying. However I still recommend you see Bad Lieutenant: Port of call new orleans. It is better than the original, and Nicholas Cage is nuts in it. Think of it more as a dark comedy. I dont know if it is playing in many theaters though.

Yeah, i still remember Ghost Rider, and Norbit. Thankfully though in Bad Lieutenant, Cage is being directed by one of my favorite directors Werner Herzog. I also recommend all his films too:P

[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"][QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

So at most, negative word of mouth gets delayed by a whole three hours?

MrGeezer

Funny thing...earlier today I saw a thread on the OT board, in which someone was complaining about professional reviewers. Things rambled on for a little bit, sort of went off on a tangent about whether the professional reviews on Rotten Tomatoes were better off than the user reviews on IMDB.

Decision wasn't unanimous, but the concensus (at least HERE, at that particular time) was that "professional reviewers" are all snooty know-it-alls who merely like to hate everything that's popular. And that if you want the best reviews, you read user reviews which are made by people who have absolutely no experience in art criticism.

That's not a definitive and scientific result, but I think that that attitude is something that has to be taken into consideration when you're making such a ridiculously expensive movie. Critics can rave all they want, but is that going to matter to the dude who thinks that "professional critics" are all just stuck-up blowhards anyway?

You and I prefer professional reviews over the opinions of Johnny Noobsauce, but the thing is that a LOT of people have the total opposite attitude. They trust their uneducated friends, and don't give one flying fart about the opinion of someone who earns a LIVING criticising movies. How MANY people think like that? I don't know. But if the recent TV spots are any indication, there are probably enough of them to be a major factor in how Fox markets the movie. Johnny Noobsauce COULD cause this movie to bomb, if there are enough people who think like Johnny Noobsauce.

Of course, that's being generous and assuming that the movie really is a masterpiece. For all I know, it might actually suck.

[QUOTE="Samurai_Xavier"]

I really disagree with those who keep saying Avatar will flop. Its not just internet people who know about the movie. In fact, its internet people who keep complaining abou tit. Dont underestimate how many fans James Cameron has. Anyone who has ever seen any of his movies (even Titanic) probably has some interest in watching Avatar.

There's something I would like to point out. When Titanic was about to come out, it was almost the exact same situation of Avatar. Everyone kept talking about how hard it was gonna flop because of its ridiculous budget and hype. I really dont think Avatar will do as well as Titanic, but believe me, I think it will make money for the same reason Titanic made money. People were curious to know whether the movie would be really good or really bad.

MrGeezer

Titanic also came out quite a while ago.

These days, word-of-mouth spreads a LOT faster. We're in the age in which movies can have solid opening day numbers, then experience a sharp drop-off THE VERY NEXT DAY and never recover from it.

Today, people driving to the cinema can get reviews on their PHONES, and decide to see a different movie.

We're in the age in which people will Tweet about every single mundane thing they're doing. "LOL...taking a dump. It stinks!"

One thing I noticed in the TV spots I've seen is that they're being vague. They're downplaying the whole "Dances With Wolves" angle and focusing instead on action shots. I am assuming that this is for monetary reasons. They think that more people won't want to watch "Dancing With Wolves and Smurfs", so they're playing up the ACTION part by showing mechs and guns and flashing captions such as "from the director of Aliens".

But do you think that this strategy is going to WORK for them in this day and age? They can downplay the "Dances With Wolves" angle all they want, everyone's still going to know about that on opening day. Meanwhile, people sitting in the cinema are going to be giving minute-by-minute updates on every lame-ass thing in the movie as it happens. As I said, word-of-mouth spreads faster now than it used to.

At best, "interest" will get you a solid opening weekend. But when your movie costs $500 million, "interest" isn't enough. You're gonna need some serious staying power, and that's a LOT harder to get, even if your movie IS a bona-fide masterpiece.

And does that $500 million figure even take into account stuff like advertising? Because if you gambled on a $500 million movie, then you'd BETTER advertise the hell out of it. Then you'd better hope that the advertising pays off, because that kind of advertising costs a LOT of ****ing money.

What are you talking about? The whole reason why Titanic is the highest grossing movie of all time IS because of word of mouth. That movie was in theatres for almost a full year because people kept talking abou tit. Using your logic, if the movie is good, word of mouth is what will make it a huge success.

What are you talking about? The whole reason why Titanic is the highest grossing movie of all time IS because of word of mouth. Using your logic, if the movie is good, word of mouth is what will make it a huge success.

Samurai_Xavier

Titanic was also one of the most critically acclaimed movies in history.

No movie in history has EVER won more Academy Awards than Titanic. Look at the movie that is tied for the record (Return of the King) and compare the box office returns. Did ROTK compare monetarily? No.

Now, do you think that Avatar is going to have close to the kind of critical praise as either Titanic or ROTK?

Again, like I said, even if Avatar is a bona-fide masterpiece, then it's STILL going to be hard for it to make its money back. It had BETTER be a bona-fide masterpiece, because that is the only way that it even stands a CHANCE of turning a profit.

[QUOTE="Samurai_Xavier"]

What are you talking about? The whole reason why Titanic is the highest grossing movie of all time IS because of word of mouth. Using your logic, if the movie is good, word of mouth is what will make it a huge success.

MrGeezer

Titanic was also one of the most critically acclaimed movies in history.

No movie in history has EVER won more Academy Awards than Titanic. Look at the movie that is tied for the record (Return of the King) and compare the box office returns. Did ROTK compare monetarily? No.

Now, do you think that Avatar is going to have close to the kind of critical praise as either Titanic or ROTK?

Again, like I said, even if Avatar is a bona-fide masterpiece, then it's STILL going to be hard for it to make its money back. It had BETTER be a bona-fide masterpiece, because that is the only way that it even stands a CHANCE of turning a profit.

I want to point out that the budget of $500 million is only speculation. The official numbers haven't been released. Same thing that happened to Titanic, hype and speculation led people to believe the movie was $300 or $400 million when in fact it was actually $200 million.

The official budget hasnt been revealed, all we know is that it is somewhere around $230 - $500 million.

A large portion of Avatar's budget was spent on developing the new 3D cameras and software, on increasing Weta's CGI farm and on creating new CGI technologies and on designing the new performance capture.

Even if the movie doesn't make its money back, all that I've listed above is an investition that will pay off in the future. The cameras are already used by a lot of other directors, and not only for motion pictures. Sony and Panasonic also have a partnership with Fox and Weta.

I don't think people are realizing that Avatar is meant to be seen in 3D. So if you don't have the glasses, you are going to be missing out on all amazing stuff. It looks great to me.

I didnt realize Astroboy even came out!

Regarding the success of Titanic, one of the reasons I remember it go so much business was because of girls wanting to see Leo over and over again. I don't know if there is a reason to see Avatar over and over.

I love how the poster of Avatar is like the other half of Waterworld. Kind of like an omen...

[QUOTE="MrEnvelope"][QUOTE="sammyjenkis898"]I have a feeling Avatar will be at the top of this list.sammyjenkis898

Theres a high chance you will ending up eating those words.

blazinpuertoroc

Titanic had a very different appeal than Avatar did..

As I said before, it could very well exceed it's budget in the states, but I'm not counting on it.

[QUOTE="blazinpuertoroc"]Theres a high chance you will ending up eating those words.

sammyjenkis898

Titanic had a very different appeal than Avatar did..

As I said before, it could very well exceed it's budget in the states, but I'm not counting on it.

Where's New Moon :cry: :PBloodSeeker1337

Do you know what bomb means?

Eddie Murphy needs to wise up. It's a miracle that he's still even ALLOWED to be in movies, after all of the many bombs that he's been associated with.

That whole "family friendly" switch that he made worked out for a little while, sure. But I think that good will for the man is running out FAST. At some point, executives are going to realize just how many of his movies are bombing, then he's gonna get stuck in the Direct-to-video category of movie Hell.

Eddie Murphy lasted a lot longer than MOST actors who consistently put out such crap. He's been lucky enough to keep from killing his career YET, but that isn't going to last forever. Unless he's planning on retiring from movies, I think he'd do well to seriously re-invent himself as an actor.

MrGeezer

Shorts! That movie of pure WTF.