Wkd Box Office Est. 039-1112 - Lorax punches Carter in his waxed & oiled thorax
- Thread starter xaosslug
- Start date
- Status
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
John Carter.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Seconded.
Saw John Carter last night and enjoyed it well enough to want to see a sequel. But since that is clearly not going to happen now, I guess I'll just read the books. I'm at a loss as to how it could have possibly cost $250 million. It really didn't look like $250 million on the screen, that's for damn sure.
Oh well, another sci-fi epic from Disney bites the dust. After Carter and Tron, I wonder how eager Disney is pursuing that Fincher 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea project now?
Oh well, another sci-fi epic from Disney bites the dust. After Carter and Tron, I wonder how eager Disney is pursuing that Fincher 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea project now?
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
Please tell me what´s so good about the movie?
I found the visuals severally lacking especially with such a huge budget. The plot was really bad, and the acting was worse.
James Woods
Banned
This is going to end doing the same as Prince of Persia. Hell, the commercials made me think it was Prince of Persia. Long haired goateed dudes in leather harnesses. Lots of deserts.
PoP had a 30m opening weekend and only did 90m total domestic. 335m WW. Budget was $200m. John Carter had the same opening weekend and will end up with similar numbers, but with a budget $50m higher.
Read this blurb from Box Office Mojo and you can just replace Prince of Persia with John Carter and everything applies.
"Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time - As an example of this movie's incompetence, looking at last spring's outdoor advertising, one would have thought it was called "May 28," which was in giant type. Turns out that was the release date, and the title was in fact Prince of Persia, which was treated as if it were a brand so established that people would just know it from the slightest of visual cues. That wasn't the case: Jerry Bruckheimer's adaptation of some video game needed all the help it could get from square one, not a marketing campaign that took the audience for granted. Disney's ads were incoherent, visually and in terms of story, and they lacked any striking spectacle in their golden brown blur. The backers even had the audacity to think that Jake Gyllenhaal was the equivalent of Johnny Depp. This all led to an uneventful $90.8 million gross, dashing dreams of a new franchise."
PoP had a 30m opening weekend and only did 90m total domestic. 335m WW. Budget was $200m. John Carter had the same opening weekend and will end up with similar numbers, but with a budget $50m higher.
Read this blurb from Box Office Mojo and you can just replace Prince of Persia with John Carter and everything applies.
"Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time - As an example of this movie's incompetence, looking at last spring's outdoor advertising, one would have thought it was called "May 28," which was in giant type. Turns out that was the release date, and the title was in fact Prince of Persia, which was treated as if it were a brand so established that people would just know it from the slightest of visual cues. That wasn't the case: Jerry Bruckheimer's adaptation of some video game needed all the help it could get from square one, not a marketing campaign that took the audience for granted. Disney's ads were incoherent, visually and in terms of story, and they lacked any striking spectacle in their golden brown blur. The backers even had the audacity to think that Jake Gyllenhaal was the equivalent of Johnny Depp. This all led to an uneventful $90.8 million gross, dashing dreams of a new franchise."
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Except that it wasn't called 'Prince'.
DevelopmentArrested
Banned
also pretty sure PoP's marketing budget was about 1/5th of John Carter's.
friskykillface
Banned
poor Eddie 
lol John Carter
lol John Carter
It was at least $100 million. Pretty close to John Carter's, which I've heard was about $120m.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/01/movies/01box.html
It's like they learned nothing from PoP but decided to do the exact same thing again, only spending 25% more.
WordAssassin
Member
I laughed heartily
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Will be interesting to see how well Nolan uses his $250mil budget. The prologue impressed me a lot.
As I recall, they did these same ads with Chronicles of Narnia. I'm not sure who in their right minds believes that they actually promote reading rather than just watching the movies.
Usually he tries to use less CGI and more real effects I think. If you try to make a large scale superhero movie that way then it probably costs more. 100 million dollars worth of street brawling.
jamesinclair
Banned
This caught my eye
Are there "current event" jokes in there?
Are there "current event" jokes in there?
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Usually being the key word. The football stadium shot from the trailer better not be the finished version.
Inception cost $185m or so from what I remember. TDKR should be a fairly significant bump. Expecting big things from the Vest.
Again, look at the crowd in the shots. They didn't even insert CGI people yet (unless Gotham's team plays in Tampa
), that's how unfinished that was.Inception and TDK came in under budget according to people who worked on them. Nolan finishes shoots on time, with no reshoots, and under budget. Disney execs just got a chubby reading this.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Again, look at the crowd in the shots. They didn't even insert CGI people yet (unless Gotham's team plays in Tampa
Inception and TDK came in under budget according to people who worked on them. Nolan finishes shoots on time, with no reshoots, and under budget. Disney execs just got a chubby reading this.
Maybe he should've used a little bit more of his budget on that helicopter crash in TDK. Or the vertical walk in Inception. Outside of replacing backgrounds, Nolan should stick to practical effects not only because they look better, but because he doesn't work well with CG.
You're still the only person I've ever seen speak of this helicopter crash like it's Die Another Day's surfing scene. Was it the best CGI ever? No. Was it bad enough to mention everytime CGI and TDK are brought up? No.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Hey, it's just jarring in a movie filled with mostly spectacular practical work. It is also one of the rare times Nolan uses CG for something that could have otherwise been done practically.
How is that even possible? At this point it looks like it will certainly hit around $300m worldwide. While that is pretty bad on a budget of 1/4 billion, certainly there are bigger failures.
Personally, I just don't see the appeal of a Disney sci-fi war film. Wouldn't have gone to see it regardless of the reviews.
Is that the budget for the new Batman movie?
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Yes.
Bel Marduk
Banned
Oh wow....
John Carter did horribly on $250 million
maybe it will recoup some of it internationally..
John Carter did horribly on $250 million
maybe it will recoup some of it internationally..
There are days when it's good. Act of Valor had less than that and was considered a tremendous success. Never is a $200 million budget film opening at $30 million ever going to be good, unless it's in one day.
EDIT: this has me wondering. Outside of Pirates of the Carribean or pretty much anything starring Johnny Depp and their golden age stuff like Swiss Family Robinson, 20,000 Leagues, etc. has Disney ever had a real breakout live action adventure film? The Black Hole failed tremendously, the original TRON was a disaster and its sequel wasnt much better, Prince of Persia and The Sorcerers Apprentice bombed back to back. It seems their big budget live action films rarely do that well.
It's a fun movie with a great soundtrack.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Narnia did relatively well. The sequels did well overseas despite poor domestic returns. Then Disney canned the series thanks to those domestic returns. :lol:
You're trying too hard.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Or not hard enough!
Seriously what was so bad about it
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Helicopter looked like it was made out of plastic. And even after using a reference model crash, the way it finally crashed still looked awfully fake. It takes me out of the scene every time because up until that point, everything had been done practically and believably. I have no idea why he copped out there.
Enchanted did well. $340 million worldwide vs budget of $85 million.
That still really wasn't a big budget film in relation to their other flops they've tried to get off the ground. They keep trying to capture that old-school adventure feel with their new movies and they keep falling short. Narnia was the only non-Depp fueled film that managed to do anything.
READINGGGG FUCK YEAH.
And check out John Carter in theaters March 9.
See You Next Wednesday
Banned
I assume you hit the 'submit reply' button before adding the word "bombs" at the end of your sentence.
I'm getting a hard on even thinking of the massive failure Battleship can be after John Carter.
And maybe, just maybe Avengers bombs too. Anything to bring down these piece of shit big dumb cgi shitfest/comic book genres movies that are plaguing cinema nowadays.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
I get the feeling you're going to be sorely disappointed in the average public moviegoers' response this coming summer.
See You Next Wednesday
Banned
polyh3dron
Banned
yes, go see it, it's good.
most people who are shitting on it haven't actually seen it, or went into it with their mind already made up.
SpeedingUptoStop
will totally Facebook friend you! *giggle* *LOL*
It costs a lot of money to get Wally the right pair of jorts.
Wally shouldn't be allowed to direct this feature he's got coming, unless we want the jort game to rival the vest game and have a brawl in the streets.
ryutaro's mama
Member
poor Eddie
The problem is, he isn't poor because studios keep giving him their money to fail over and over with.
- Status