World War Z and After Earth are predicted to be huge financial flops this summer - but I see things differently.

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments.

  • Comment number 59. Posted by malowski

    on 7 Aug 2013 12:28

    @.MiddleClassFury

    That film easily made its money back and made a bit of a profit as well.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 59: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 59: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 58. Posted by Steven

    on 7 Aug 2013 08:25

    Starting to look like The Lone Ranger will be the exception to prove the rule: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23598825

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 58: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 58: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 57. Posted by Cool Hand Smiley

    on 24 Jul 2013 10:41

    The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey should have been a flop but wasn't due to the success of the Lord of The Rings. It will be interesting to see the box office figures for The Desolation of Smaug this time around.

    Similarly Quantum of Solace was successful thanks largely to Casino Royale.

    More recently Prometheus and Man of Steel could have been flops however due to the hype and marketing it manages to be successful at the box office.

    To summarise I think there are a lot of average films that avoid being a flop and this is due to the success of an earlier film or who is directing / producing.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 57: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 57: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 56. Posted by Lost Leonardo

    on 9 Jul 2013 17:38

    I love the optimism of Mark's formulation, but based on past results fear that the studios are unlikely to be convinced. Hey, if you follow these rules, you will make money, so you might as well make something interesting also works the other way - if we're going to make money, why go to the extra effort of making something interesting. I would like to think, one could use their own rules against them as it were if it meant more interesting films getting green lit. We will see, I guess.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 56: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 56: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 55. Posted by Sidian

    on 9 Jul 2013 01:55

    For a recent example, how about The Lone Ranger? Massive budget. Johnny Depp. Not a comedy. Massive flop.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 55: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 55: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 54. Posted by gazzyc

    on 7 Jul 2013 17:38

    The Lone Ranger is looking like a film to keep an eye on, with low box office returns. Lots been written about the 200+ Million dollars Disney has spent on the movie and with Johnny Depp involved looked like it could avoid flop status. Does it fall under comedy? Well the trailers not very funny.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 54: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 54: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 53. Posted by Dom

    on 5 Jul 2013 16:17

    Just like to second the reference to Battlefield Earth as a contender for disproving the formula. Would also like to add Catwoman as a possibility.

    I think we need a consensus on the data source for figures when discussing this topic. Where do we get reliable information on the money made by films which include DVD sales to date?

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 53: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 53: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 52. Posted by anniemouse

    on 3 Jul 2013 22:02

    Can someone confirm or dispel something I seem to recall. Is it true that the studio execs that green lit the Shawshank Redemption all lost their jobs or is that an urban myth.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 52: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 52: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 51. Posted by thepickleruk

    on 3 Jul 2013 20:45

    John Carter has, I believe from various articles, made it's money back from DVD sales. So that didn't need a A list start. Doesn't disprove Mark's rules. But I wish Mark would stop using this as the stick he continues to use to prove his rules. It was an ok movie and it's made its money back.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 51: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 51: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 50. Posted by Christopher Hearne

    on 2 Jul 2013 22:06

    Dear mark

    I would like to add another argument to contributing factory of a film being a flop.

    Last night I went to see the new Jason Statham film Hummingbird, which I enjoyed immensely. Statham gave the performance of his career with an intelligent combination acting and action which gives a more three-dimensional characterization instead of his kick arse one-dimensional action packed roles; this is mainly thanks to the screenplay by Steven Knight who in my opinion gave David Cronenberg his best motion picture Eastern Promises.

    However I very nearly didn’t go to my local multiplex cinema to see this film because of the lack of availability, the film was only show once a day and at a late time of 9.30pm. I was also the only one in the cinema and it made me think is it the lack of availability as well as inappropriate showing times that also contributes to the film being a flop? It is not always possible to see a film at these late times due to personal commitments and even though you can research other cinemas for alternative time to see them, which I have done before, however it is not always a financial option as you have to pay for petrol or alternative travel, car parking, food and beverages and then the cinema tickets. It could also be because the cinema is showing 3 to 4 different blockbuster films in two different formats 2D and 3D, monopolizing the cinemas and so they do not providing versatility and variety.

    I have found out that Hummingbird will no longer be showing at the local cinema at the end of the week and it would have only had seven showing over seven days, which also asks the question with the lack of availability would it not also affect its success at the box office?

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 50: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 50: 0
    Loading…
More comments

More Posts

Previous

Next