Borat was a critically acclaimed smash, and it seemed like this one would be too. But critics weren't as kind, and Cinemascore reported that the average viewer gave the movie a "C", so the word of mouth was pretty bad. It opened to about $30mil., and made exactly throughout the rest of it's run.
Granted, "The Polar Express" wasn't the greatest critical success of all time, but it still made a pretty penny at the box office. While this one maid a decent amount, it still was not as big as "Express," nor did it remake it's budget, at least not in the U.S.
Easily one of the most unfairly overlooked movies of 2011, I actually really enjoyed this one. It's not so much a horror movie as a supernatural thriiler, but it also had some funny bits, and Colin Farrell was a genuinely creepy villian. Had the luxury of going up against "The Help" when it was just starting to heat up.
A comic book adaptation, a massive budget, and well known star, and a prime summer release date. For any other movie, these would be the makings of a huge box office champion, but when GL was released, it landed with a thud. Okay, so the opening weekend of $53mil. was not terribly bad considering, but it held very poorly, and audiences were turned off by it's routine plot and lack of inspiration.
It had the right ingredients. The star and director of one of the most successful franchises ever, "Bourne," and a real world topic with the guarantee of big, realistic action. But the interest just wasn't there, and the marketing did a poor job of explaining why an audience might care.
I knew that it had virtually no chance of coming close to the original, but I at least thought it might make enough to be worth the effort. Maybe audiences just didn't want to see a 15th Nic Cage movie this year alone.
Come, did anyone expect this one to bomb? The first one was a beloved, Oscar winning hit. Yet, the studio put a terrible marketing campaign into it, as well as position it against a Twilight movie. And to cap it all off, the movie got pretty lackluster reviews.
First off, I actually liked this one, granted I thought that it started quite slowly, it was still quite visually impressive. But Disney pulled every stop, and gave this movie possibly the worst marketing campaign in the history of movies. With a $250mil budget, and title as generic and as uninclusive as they come, this was destined to fail.
While the film is undeniably beautiful to look at, parents really didn't want to take there kids to see a movie about cute owls fighting and killing each other, and older crowds thought that it was meaning for kids.
It had been 20 years since the last "Predator" movie had been released, with the exclusion of the "AVP" franchise, so fan expectations were high going in. But while it did fairly well with critics, audiences thought that it was trying to rip off the original, adding nothing new to the franchise.
While it still did well, this is one many predicted would take the box office by storm. It did on opening weekend, but was too polarizing for audiences to go back for more, and mixed word of mouth did not help either.
In 2000, Ridley Scott & Russell Crowe teamed up to bring us the massive Oscar winning epic "Gladiator," so many thought that these two going back to a period piece with such a widely known figure would be a slam dunk. It opened well enough, but soon cooled off, and barely cracked the $100mil. mark. Critics and audiences were turned off by the familiarity of the project, and baffled by Crowe's accent.
Not as bad of a movie as it's made out to be, but just too bland to really care enough to see. The marketing put more of an emphasis on the "good time" feel of the film, while not promoting the biggest star, an brightest spot, of the film Tom Cruise.
Prediction: At least $100mil.
You wouldn't really thing of it as a bomb had the budget been smaller, but at over $60mil., this one did infact bomb. Many had predicted that it would play well with the indie/alt. crowd, which it did, when it was released on DVD. Also not helping the case, the releases of "Eat, Prey, Love" and "The Expendables" on the same weekend.
11 years after the dissapointing "Scream 3," most were expecting a revival of the franchise. This one was a case where people thought that it would succeed, without actually going to see it. Plus, it opened up against animated family flick "Rio."
"300" was a monster hit, and while "Watchmen" was not a huge hit, it still had it's fans. When "Sucker Punch" was released, critics ravaged it, and audiences were turned off as well. Personally, I hated it and can completely understand why it bombed, but I have to admit that it is truly a visual achievement.
Prediction: At least $100mil.
While this one did make $200mil., it seemed destined for more. While it did finish around %76 positive on Rotten Tomatoes, audiences did not feel the same way, being turned off by it's routine plot and some unconvincing acting.
Jack & Jill was pure shit, and failed to hit the $100mil. pool that the Sandman usually swims in. After that misstep, it seemed like good business to go back to his original brand of raunchy humor to get him back on track. But with plot points revolving around paedophilia, incest, and teenage parenting, it turned audiences off, and became Sandler's lowest grossing film since the 90's.
One of the movies that I thought would at least do well. It's not that it's a really bad movie, it just isn't as memorable or a thought provoking as the original. Of coarse, going up against "The Dark Knight Rises" 3rd weekend probably didn't help.
Coming off of the big success of "300," Warner Bros. and Zack Snyder opted to adapted the beloved graphic novel as there next blockbuster, but they learned a valuable lesson in the process. You can make a great film, with some strong performance and lush production design, but nobody wants to sit through almost three hours of floating blue penis.