King Arthur: Legend of the Sword debuted this weekend, making $15M domestic and about $30M overseas from 51 markets. China's debut was only $5M, and the film is unlikely to get much higher than $10M there. Even Valerian is going to have a tough time topping it for bomb of the summer.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/he...-arthur-could-lose-150m-falling-sword-1003638
I trimmed about half of the article, so follow the link if you want to read the whole thing.
Many people (including a lot of movie-GAF) were expecting poor results for King Arthur. However, the previously rumored budget was a lot closer to $100M, and the film ended up bombing even worse than expected. Analysts were expecting a $25M weekend domestically, and much more overseas one week from release.
Ghost in the Shell is no longer the highest profile bomb of 2017.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/he...-arthur-could-lose-150m-falling-sword-1003638
King Arthur, starring Charlie Hunnam in the titular role, could lose $150 million or more for partners Warners and Village Roadshow after costing $175 million to make before a major marketing spend, according to box-office experts who say the movie isn't likely to earn more than $145 million globally (studios only get half back in box-office receipts in the U.S, and even less overseas). RatPac-Dune Entertainment the film financing entity launched in 2013 by Steve Mnuchin (who is now U.S. Treasury secretary), James Packer and filmmaker Brett Ratner also has a stake in the movie.
A Warner Bros. spokesman disputed that the loss could climb to $150 million for the various partners.
"King Arthur is a paint-by-numbers Hollywood disaster wrong director, wrong cast, wrong script, etc.," says box-office analyst Jeff Bock. "The whole Game of Thrones-on-steroids direction the studio went with from the get-go just didn't get anyone psyched to see this."
Bock, along with others, says Hunnam (Sons of Anarchy, Pacific Rim) wasn't enough of a movie star to carry the film. "TV stardom is one thing; for these epics, you need an equally epic lead performance," says Bock.
Marking the first major miss of summer 2017, King Arthur also boasts one of the lowest domestic openings of all time for a big-budget major studio title after Monster Trucks, the movie that prompted Paramount to take a $125 million write-down even before debuting to $11 million in January of this year, and Disney's 2011 Mars Needs Moms ($6.9 million).
King Arthur: Legend of the Sword unfurls during a time of transition for Warner Bros., where the production regime that oversaw the film's long road to the big screen has been ousted in favor of new leadership.
The coming weeks will be crucial for Warners' marketing and production team as it launches summer tentpole Wonder Woman on June 2 and Christopher Nolan's World War II action-epic Dunkirk on July 21.
"It isn't particularly surprising that King Arthur flopped in North America. I don't remember the last time a medieval film was successful in this market. The story just doesn't seem to resonate here anymore, and someone tries to resurrect it seemingly every five to 10 years," says Wall Street analyst Eric Handler of MKM Partners. "What I did find surprising was the weak numbers internationally, particularly in Europe."
I trimmed about half of the article, so follow the link if you want to read the whole thing.
Many people (including a lot of movie-GAF) were expecting poor results for King Arthur. However, the previously rumored budget was a lot closer to $100M, and the film ended up bombing even worse than expected. Analysts were expecting a $25M weekend domestically, and much more overseas one week from release.
Ghost in the Shell is no longer the highest profile bomb of 2017.