2019 Box Office Busts

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Gemini man is a huge dud! Will smith had his highest grossing movie (Aladdin) and worst grossing movie in the same year!

Film could lose the studio $161m! It's one of the biggest bombs this year!

Never mind that being of the biggest bombs of the year, how about one of the biggest bombs of the DECADE?

However, don't look for Will Smith to be down long. He's got another film coming out in December I believe, an animated feature called Spies In Disguise where he voices a super cool, tuxedo clad, James Bond-like secret agent working alongside a dweebish version of Q voiced by Spider-Man's Tom Holland. Animated films continue to do well, and this should help Smith erase the stain from Gemini Man.

[ISleepNow]

LOL.

Thank goodness Marvel Studios has their franchise back. Fox has done basically nothing with this franchise, other than make Hugh Jackman a household name.

Futures Past is probably one of the best time travel movies ever made. The idea of sending a soul back in time which doesn't involve sending any matter back in time was a really great idea.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Its been a couple weeks and this weeks bombs examine an animated film that was released back in September that quickly faded as well as a big budget film by an actor and director that used to be on a hot streak.



Total Box Office : $159+ million worldwide

Total Production Budget : $75 million

Abominable was released in middle of September by Universal . The animated film had a not so well known voice cast and quickly dived down the following weeks. With such a high production budget and only doing $58+ million domestically. The film has done better internationally as shown and comically has a Japan release date....in June 2020 according to IMDB.



Total Box Office : $161.9 + million (worldwide)

Total Production Budget : $138 million

Will Smith and Ang Lee teaming up a decade ago in 2000's would have been a huge team. A decade later a struggling Will Smith and Ang Lee united to do this film under Paramount. As pointed out this film will likely cost Paramount $100+ million in losses. The film had been in production for nearly 2 decades under numerous actors and directors attached until Lee and Smith came to it. Will Smith has the 3rd Bad Boys movie coming in a few months to rebound off this bust.




Total Box Office $9+ million (worldwide)

Total Production Budget : $30 million


This film has a pretty wild story and was actually completed in 2017. It was supposed to release under the Weinstein Group but due to that situation the film was soon held up. A new company called 101 Studios got the distribution rights to this film. The movie starred Benedict Cumberbatch , Tom Holland and Michael Shannon and focused on the electrical race of 1800's with Thomas Edison. The film was directed by Alfonso Gomez-Rejon and produced by Martin Scorsese. To get the film released now Rejon convinced Scorsese to trim 10 minutes off the run time to get it released in theaters. Where it was a bust.

[Immortal Weapon]

Make room for the new Terminator film. It's already been reported that Paramount is set to lose $100 million on it.

[Cyke]

Make room for the new Terminator film. It's already been reported that Paramount is set to lose $100 million on it.

I liked it overall, but I'm sorry to say that I'm not surprised. I thought the performances were well done and it was sensible how Sarah and the T-800 were portrayed, buuuuut -- the film could never shake off that smell of desperation.

[titanfan]

I liked it overall, but I'm sorry to say that I'm not surprised. I thought the performances were well done and it was sensible how Sarah and the T-800 were portrayed, buuuuut -- the film could never shake off that smell of desperation.

People are saying that the gross on the film was pretty easy to project, but because Genesys did well in China, they thought this film would be a bigger hit overseas. The problem on the film was the budget.

[KabutoRyder]

Futures Past is probably one of the best time travel movies ever made. The idea of sending a soul back in time which doesn't involve sending any matter back in time was a really great idea.

I mean, except it wasn't....more like a terribly conceived idea to have Jackman lead the movie, but ok....

[WestPhillyPunisher]

I know it's a bit early to make such a judgment, but it looks like the latest version of Charlie's Angels landed with a thud, scoring just $8.6 million for a third place finish in it's opening weekend. With a budget of $48 million, the chances of the film breaking even aren't too terribly good.

[Killerbee911]

I know it's a bit early to make such a judgment, but it looks like the latest version of Charlie's Angels landed with a thud, scoring just $8.6 million for a third place finish in it's opening weekend. With a budget of $48 million, the chances of the film breaking even aren't too terribly good.

That is fair prediction , Frozen 2 is going to murder everything in path. It is hard to imagine it doing better with Frozen around.

[Osiris-Rex]

I know it's a bit early to make such a judgment, but it looks like the latest version of Charlie's Angels landed with a thud, scoring just $8.6 million for a third place finish in it's opening weekend. With a budget of $48 million, the chances of the film breaking even aren't too terribly good.

As a comparison, the Drew Barrymore version in 2000 made $40 million on her opening weekend, and the sequel in 2003 made $38 million opening weekend, not adjusted for inflation.

[Scott Taylor]

Haha I was looking at Rotten Tomatoes and this review by Louisa Moore over at Screen Zealots was funny:

"This isn’t an inherently bad movie, it’s just an almost-turd that’s been given a sparkly new sheen from a bit of the ol’ Hollywood polish. The main reason it’s still watchable is that the actors all seem to be having fun. Scott is charming, Balinska’s athleticism is entertaining to watch, and Stewart steals every scene she’s in. While all are likeable individually, they have almost zero chemistry together. Even Banks, who is obviously in love with herself as both an actor and now a filmmaker, isn’t as annoying as usual.

I do believe the feminist messages here are delivered from a heartfelt place, but many of the “hooray for women!” moments feel forced at best and ridiculously hokey at worst. The attempts at comedy fall flat, the big twists are lame, and the action scenes are uninspired. But hey, at least there are lots of snazzy costumes and wardrobe changes, exotic locales, and a dance number to keep the energy up.

"Charlie’s Angels” is the type of movie that’s best suited for watching on an airplane or anywhere else where you’re trapped and in dire need of entertainment. It’s sadly not as good as it could be (or that I hoped it to be), and that’s a real bummer."

Sounds eerily similar to a certain Ghostbusters movie.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Haha I was looking at Rotten Tomatoes and this review by Louisa Moore over at Screen Zealots was funny:

"This isn’t an inherently bad movie, it’s just an almost-turd that’s been given a sparkly new sheen from a bit of the ol’ Hollywood polish. The main reason it’s still watchable is that the actors all seem to be having fun. Scott is charming, Balinska’s athleticism is entertaining to watch, and Stewart steals every scene she’s in. While all are likeable individually, they have almost zero chemistry together. Even Banks, who is obviously in love with herself as both an actor and now a filmmaker, isn’t as annoying as usual.

I do believe the feminist messages here are delivered from a heartfelt place, but many of the “hooray for women!” moments feel forced at best and ridiculously hokey at worst. The attempts at comedy fall flat, the big twists are lame, and the action scenes are uninspired. But hey, at least there are lots of snazzy costumes and wardrobe changes, exotic locales, and a dance number to keep the energy up.

"Charlie’s Angels” is the type of movie that’s best suited for watching on an airplane or anywhere else where you’re trapped and in dire need of entertainment. It’s sadly not as good as it could be (or that I hoped it to be), and that’s a real bummer."

Sounds eerily similar to a certain Ghostbusters movie.

It also like Ghostbusters has the creator deciding to go into attack mode because the world didn't demand a Charlie's Angels movie made by her. Claiming there has been 9 Spider-Man movies as part of her anger at it likely bombing.

[Immortal Weapon]

According to Elizabeth Banks, director of Charlie's Angels, Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel were successful because comic book movies are a male genre
https://twitter.com/getfandom/status...068575744?s=21

[Frontier]

According to Elizabeth Banks, director of Charlie's Angels, Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel were successful because comic book movies are a male genre
https://twitter.com/getfandom/status...068575744?s=21

...Well, I think initially comics and comic book movies definitely catered to men in some regards, but I think now the genre is much more gender-neutral in terms of appeal.

[Aahz]

According to Elizabeth Banks, director of Charlie's Angels, Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel were successful because comic book movies are a male genre
https://twitter.com/getfandom/status...068575744?s=21

I thinkt it is more because Captain Marvel is part of the MCU, which is the most popular Moviefranchise at the moment, and came out that close to endgame.
And Wonder Woman is one of the most iconic comic charcters.

Most lesser know female charcters will (without beeing part of the MCU) also not do that great at the box office. (And that probaly also applies to a lot of lesser known male charcters)