|
|
Post by conspirologist on Mar 13, 2017 2:12:51 GMT
It is really weird that some good movies bombed at the box office. It is always hard to believe, when a movie that has all the qualities to be considered good doesn't make the deserved acclaim from critics or box office, or even both. As an example I can name The Thing, or Strange Days. Both are great sci-fi movies with a lot of rewatchable qualities, made by great directors and with amazing casts, but flopped. Interesting to notice, that today a lot of critics started praising The Thing, which is also a classic cult movie now.
Do you have more examples of other good movies that unexplainably became flops?
|
|
sariz
Sophomore
@sariz
Posts: 422
Likes: 70
 
|
Post by sariz on Mar 13, 2017 3:30:36 GMT
Rush with Chris Hemsworth.
I loveeed that film but it seems like very few people watched it because its about F1 and its not a popular sport.
but the film is not that much about the sport is about two men who saw one sport in a different way and lived it dfifferently.
|
|
|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on Mar 13, 2017 3:42:58 GMT
 Released the same day as The Thing. It's easy to say both films were unsuccessful due to E.T, which itself is a terrific film but far removed from the downbeat narratives provided by Scott and Carpenter. |
|
flasuss
Sophomore
@flasuss
Posts: 323
Likes: 147
|
Post by flasuss on Mar 13, 2017 5:36:39 GMT
Rush with Chris Hemsworth. I loveeed that film but it seems like very few people watched it because its about F1 and its not a popular sport. but the film is not that much about the sport is about two men who saw one sport in a different way and lived it dfifferently. But that was an unexplainable failure. Hell, outside the US, wasn't a failure at all! Anyway, my default answer to this is Master & Commander. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2017 6:02:05 GMT
I'm not surprised when good movies bomb at the box office. It's easy to explain why people did not watch Fight Club or Office Space or Dredd or Idiocracy.
Sometimes I'm surprised when shitty movies bomb -- "Hey, why didn't that do well?? It has everything going for it: it looks completely retarded." Unfortunately, examples do not spring to mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by Utpe on Mar 13, 2017 6:12:35 GMT
Last Action Hero (1993) I believe. I have no idea why that movie fell so hard. It now has a certain following itself from what I understand. Maybe it was just ahead of its time.
|
|
|
|
Post by louise on Mar 13, 2017 6:45:10 GMT
A Good Year (2006) did terribly. I think it an absolutely delightful film and can't understand why it did so badly.
|
|
|
|
Post by kingkoopa on Mar 13, 2017 7:05:58 GMT
Last Action Hero (1993) I believe. I have no idea why that movie fell so hard. It now has a certain following itself from what I understand. Maybe it was just ahead of its time. Criminally underrated movie IMHO. Arnold was equally great in the action and comedic elements. I felt like it was a love letter to action fans with the guts of a very ambitious story. I had fun with it and still do. |
|
|
|
Post by kingkoopa on Mar 13, 2017 7:10:39 GMT
I'd throw in "The Rocketeer" and "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow."
Both set in more or less the same era...I don't know why movies set in this period tend to bomb.
|
|
sariz
Sophomore
@sariz
Posts: 422
Likes: 70
|
Post by sariz on Mar 13, 2017 19:48:09 GMT
Rush with Chris Hemsworth. I loveeed that film but it seems like very few people watched it because its about F1 and its not a popular sport. but the film is not that much about the sport is about two men who saw one sport in a different way and lived it dfifferently. But that was an unexplainable failure. Hell, outside the US, wasn't a failure at all! Anyway, my default answer to this is Master & Commander. Rush did well outside of the States? That's weird how it just failed on the states but in many other countries was a hit. |
|
TheSowIsMine
Junior Member
@thesowismine
Posts: 2,683
Likes: 1,746
|
Post by TheSowIsMine on Mar 13, 2017 19:53:53 GMT
But that was an unexplainable failure. Hell, outside the US, wasn't a failure at all! Anyway, my default answer to this is Master & Commander. Rush did well outside of the States? That's weird how it just failed on the states but in many other countries was a hit. The rest of the world loves F1. |
|
|
|
Post by fangirl1975 on Mar 13, 2017 20:21:15 GMT
Rush with Chris Hemsworth. I loveeed that film but it seems like very few people watched it because its about F1 and its not a popular sport. but the film is not that much about the sport is about two men who saw one sport in a different way and lived it dfifferently. Rush(2013) is an excellent film. I saw it because I have the hots for Chris Hemsworth.  |
|
egerianouma
New Member
"Choose life. Choose Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and hope that someone, somewhere cares" Renton-T2
@egerianouma
Posts: 39
Likes: 7
|
Post by egerianouma on Mar 13, 2017 20:33:26 GMT
Fight Club.
It's an amazing movie, based on a very well written novel. Most people say it's a boy's wet dream, but as a woman I ca say it changed my way of thinking about society, politics and fanatism. All three protagonists were exactly how the novel described them and the cinematography stays with you long after you finish the movie...
(of course I had just turned 20 and I have seen it over 10 times since. Perhaps if I saw it now for the first time, my response to it might be different.)
|
|
misternick
Sophomore
@misternick
Posts: 174
Likes: 62
|
Post by misternick on Mar 13, 2017 21:45:29 GMT
I'd throw in "The Rocketeer" and "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow." Both set in more or less the same era...I don't know why movies set in this period tend to bomb. IMHO Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow was a really bad film. It had no story and it's really hard to look at, I feel like there's a layer of gauze over the entire film. |
|
sariz
Sophomore
@sariz
Posts: 422
Likes: 70
|
Post by sariz on Mar 13, 2017 22:23:34 GMT
Rush with Chris Hemsworth. I loveeed that film but it seems like very few people watched it because its about F1 and its not a popular sport. but the film is not that much about the sport is about two men who saw one sport in a different way and lived it dfifferently. Rush(2013) is an excellent film. I saw it because I have the hots for Chris Hemsworth. Every woman in this world has the hots for Chris Hemsworth. He is one of the hottest actors playing a super hero along with Robert Downey Jr ( Iron Man) and Christian Bale (Batman) |
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Mar 13, 2017 22:45:06 GMT
The Nice Guys is the most recent one I can think of. A sweet throwback to the crime/action thrillers of the 70s and 80s but it bombed badly. *does internet research. five seconds later* FUCK this was released the same day as THE ANGRY BIRDS MOVIE. Dammit Warner Bros! Can you do anything right?!?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2017 0:59:24 GMT
Some not mentioned:
Labyrinth--What went wrong? This film has a cult following now.
Donnie Darko--I am still trying to wrap my brain around this film.
Sunshine (2007)--This film is criminally under rated, and I don't care about the science problems with the premise.
Chicken Little (2005)--This movie is just charming compared to so much of the crap out there CGI wise.
Monkeybone--Clever film with an interesting plot.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2017 1:28:26 GMT
That would due to the Hollywood climate at the time. They didn't know how to advertise fantasy films and most films of the genre just didn't do well at the box office during that period.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Mar 14, 2017 1:38:25 GMT
I'd throw in "The Rocketeer" and "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow." Both set in more or less the same era...I don't know why movies set in this period tend to bomb. IMHO Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow was a really bad film. It had no story and it's really hard to look at, I feel like there's a layer of gauze over the entire film. Gee, too bad that you think that about it. I recently rewatched it a few nights ago and enjoyed it just as much as I had the first time. There are flaws, to be sure, but the film's heart is so obviously in the right place, and its playing is so good and adroitness so manifest, that I tend to overlook them. I agree about the "layer of gauze" criticism--it annoyed me more on my first viewing, when I wasn't expecting it--but even there the point is to give it that comic-book feel that is so missing from the more realist modern-day superhero movies (especially DC's new films, unfortunately, and Marvel to some extent as well). It interests me that you should state that it has no story, because I found it to have more story than the majority of modern-day "blow 'er up!" blockbusters (e.g., Transformers and its ill-bred ilk). It is witty (though perhaps less so than it wishes to be) and intelligent (when was the last time you heard a script quote John Masefield's "Sea Fever"?), and the characters are likable (one genuinely wants them to succeed) and charming. There are no major twists, and the action sequences may seem "hokey" to the jaded modern viewer, but that is exactly the point. I find it delightful, though not as good a movie as The Rocketeer. And, whatever one thinks of Sky Captain, what Hollywood did to director Kerry Conran is unforgivable. |
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Mar 14, 2017 1:41:04 GMT
I'd throw in "The Rocketeer" and "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow." Both set in more or less the same era...I don't know why movies set in this period tend to bomb. I agree on both accounts. The Rocketeer in particular is an excellent, exciting, adventurous, riveting film, beautifully done. And Jennifer Connelly is impossibly lovely in it. To answer your point, I'm not sure either, except possibly that we jaded moderns care not a whit for the charm and poise of the "greatest era," and, indeed, we are all the worse off for it. |
|
