The Shittest Blockbuster (a "who did they even think this was for?" thread)

[hewantstolurkatad]

It's been a pretty bad year for blockbusters but at least with the likes of Batman vs Superman, you can see how that's a brand that warrants having a lot of money thrown its way. On top of that you've got some fairly big names involved to boot.


Out of all of this year's flops, one that really stands out to me for how little it stood out is The Legend of Tarzan, a $180 million budget film with Stellan Skarsgaard. It's actually done relatively okay in the box office but I find it extremely hard to imagine how it could've done any better, like, who gives a f*ck about Tarzan? What about the trailers for that film make it look like it's going to do anything interesting with the character?


So yeah, any other blockbusters you can think of that made you go "wait, who exactly is this even for?"

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

John Carter

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

To hell with Edgar Rice Burroughs!

[Bad Ambassador]

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

[Obel]

Gods of Egypt. I watched the first 30 minutes of it on a flight back from Canada and I can't imagine who it was meant to entertain. It's movies like this that explain why they won't throw huge budgets towards original scripts.

Also The Lone Ranger w/ Johnny Depp.

[mothman]

I can't imagine they're throwing serious, proper-globalised-blockbuster money at a Jumanji remake, but all the same one has to wonder why do it at all.

[thecuriousorange]

The recent Ghostbusters. People above a certain age were hostile to it and those below that age flat-out ignored it. I wonder if this will be a turning point for remake/boots. They seem very keen to point out that the new Jumanji is a sequel and not a reboot.

[thraxx]

Wild Wild Wild Wild Wild Fucking West.

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

The recent Ghostbusters. People above a certain age were hostile to it and those below that age flat-out ignored it. I wonder if this will be a turning point for remake/boots. They seem very keen to point out that the new Jumanji is a sequel and not a reboot.

Didn't Independence Day 2 also flop? First the original scripts became too risky, then the star system went to heck - with even the A-list topping likes of Tom Cruise and Robert Downey Jr. failing to draw audiences, outside of their big franchise[nb]Ugh[/nb] roles. Now it seems established brands[nb]Uuurgh[/nb] aren't working. What's next?

[thecuriousorange]

I just found out that there's a Godzilla and King Kong "shared universe". There was a Godzilla film in 2014 which links in with "Kong: Skull Island" which is out next year. Two more solo movies are planned before a "versus" showdown one in 2020.

Thanks, but no thanks.

[Eis Nein]

The recent Ghostbusters. People above a certain age were hostile to it

Let's not mosey around the bandstand. Twats were hostile, in cheeringly small enough numbers to make their whiny protests almost imperceptible.

I just found out that there's a Godzilla and King Kong "shared universe". There was a Godzilla film in 2014 which links in with "Kong: Skull Island" which is out next year. Two more solo movies are planned before a "versus" showdown one in 2020.

Thanks, but no thanks.

It's not much of a counter, but it's guaranteed of the leads with respect to BvS that the acting will be better and their motivations clear and understandable.

Besides, how can we finally discover which is best?

[Shaky]

Avatar(t). It might be quite trendy to knock it now, but it really is the fucking pits.

[thecuriousorange]

Does anyone ever win in these franchise vs franchise films?

Nobody does in

Spoiler alert

Batman

[close]

versus

Spoiler alert

Superman

[close]

or in

Spoiler alert

Freddy

[close]

versus

Spoiler alert

Jason

[close]

. It's always just a boring draw. So don't expect King Kong to kill Godzilla.

[hewantstolurkatad]

Didn't Independence Day 2 also flop? First the original scripts became too risky, then the star system went to heck - with even the A-list topping likes of Tom Cruise and Robert Downey Jr. failing to draw audiences, outside of their big franchise[nb]Ugh[/nb] roles. Now it seems established brands[nb]Uuurgh[/nb] aren't working. What's next?

Independence Day isn't exactly an established brand though. It's a film that was likely on the backburner for two decades and all the people involved never realised that the original had lost a lot of its value as a brand in the meantime.

Wild Wild Wild Wild Wild Fucking West.

Oh god yes. Everything about that one was dodgy. Remaking 60s tv shows was a fad that had come and gone, it wasn't exactly a show anyone was pushed about to begin with, it suffered from having the remnants of the superman film and being a really desperate attempt to redo Men in Black but in a steampunk west.
The sort of thing where they thought they were capturing everything people wanted from a blockbuster but were actually just serving up a big pile of slop.

The recent Ghostbusters. People above a certain age were hostile to it and those below that age flat-out ignored it. I wonder if this will be a turning point for remake/boots. They seem very keen to point out that the new Jumanji is a sequel and not a reboot.

They've done this a few times, big budget sci-fi comedies in that patch thats meant to attract the apathetic audience that don't want to go to a blockbuster but want to see something in the cinema in the summer like this and the Watch. That audience wants to see the 40 Year Old Virgin (which I like) or the Hangover (which I don't) though, not some sci-fi nonsense.
Would've done fine if they kept the budget low, it didn't need the size of a marketing campaign it had either, the brand brought plenty of attention.

There's probably a whole other thread for films that went a bit insane with their marketing campaigns.

I can't imagine they're throwing serious, proper-globalised-blockbuster money at a Jumanji remake, but all the same one has to wonder why do it at all.

The Rock as a weird manchild in a jungle, I think it could work really well to be honest. He's one of if not the biggest drawing star at the moment so I can see how they'll throw money at slightly off concepts that could suit him.

John Carter

Oh god yeah. Close the thread!
Seemed like just about everyone before release was like "what in the fuck is this? It's by Andrew Staunton so I suppose we should give him the benefit of the doubt but... fuck" As far as hugely successful filmmakers wasting all their goodwill on making their dream project goes, this has got to be the biggest waste of goodwill.
At least things like Southland Tales are odd as fuck.

[Dr Rock]

I just found out that there's a Godzilla and King Kong "shared universe". There was a Godzilla film in 2014 which links in with "Kong: Skull Island" which is out next year. Two more solo movies are planned before a "versus" showdown one in 2020.

Thanks, but no thanks.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056142/

They done it already. I remember seeing this on the telly back in the 70s.

[phantom_power]

Who was crying out for a Ben Hur re-imagining?

[clingfilm portent]

Let me guess, at a crucial moment they discover their mums had the same name after which they decide to team up and fight Ghidorah?

[Blumf]

Let me guess, at a crucial moment they discover their mums had the same name after which they decide to team up and fight Ghidorah?

"Save Mothra!"
"Why did you say that name? Mothra?"

[clingfilm portent]

I was about 7/8 when this came out.

Mario was hardly my favourite thing ever - how could it be with Samus Aran on the scene - but I was still excited to see it. I couldn't quite wrap my head around what I was seeing. This wasn't some weird knock off, this was supposed to the real thing, so I really tried to roll with it. I actually succeeded to some degree somehow. There was just a part of my brain that wouldn't allow me to think it was shit which I suppose is some minor perk of being a child.

Also, searching for a reasonably sized poster of Super Mario Bros. I found this work of insanity:

[clingfilm portent]

"Save Mothra!"
"Why did you say that name? Mothra?"

Well done that man!

[Shit Good Nose]

The Legend of Tarzan, a $180 million budget film with Stellan Skarsgaard.

I don't know if seeing Stellan as Tarzan would be amazing or abysmal.

A must-watch either way though, and for very different reasons.

[Small Man Big Horse]

Oh god yeah. Close the thread!
Seemed like just about everyone before release was like "what in the fuck is this? It's by Andrew Staunton so I suppose we should give him the benefit of the doubt but... fuck" As far as hugely successful filmmakers wasting all their goodwill on making their dream project goes, this has got to be the biggest waste of goodwill.
At least things like Southland Tales are odd as fuck.

I really enjoyed John Carter, it's a greatly entertaining romp which has a lot of superb set pieces. I think it only failed due to poor marketing, and confusion over what to call it which went on for ages.

[hewantstolurkatad]

I really enjoyed John Carter, it's a greatly entertaining romp which has a lot of superb set pieces. I think it only failed due to poor marketing, and confusion over what to call it which went on for ages.

Ah now, how would you have marketed it? The film being a lot of fun is borderline irrelevant with blockbusters. It was extremely out of touch with the times, and not in a way that kids would be intrigued by.

I don't know if seeing Stellan as Tarzan would be amazing or abysmal.

Shit, I meant his hot son!
Hot, but with f*ck all in the way of name-recognition.

[Blumf]

I really enjoyed John Carter, it's a greatly entertaining romp which has a lot of superb set pieces. I think it only failed due to poor marketing, and confusion over what to call it which went on for ages.

This. It's a good film.

[Ignatius_S]

I really enjoyed John Carter, it's a greatly entertaining romp which has a lot of superb set pieces. I think it only failed due to poor marketing, and confusion over what to call it which went on for ages.

Marketing was a factor, but there were other issues and waaaaay too much had been spent on it. Prior to released, public criticism of the marketing people were putting the boot into the film and word of mouth were awful.

Ah now, how would you have marketed it? The film being a lot of fun is borderline irrelevant with blockbusters. It was extremely out of touch with the times, and not in a way that kids would be intrigued by....

Getting someone who knew how to market films would have been a good start.

If you have a film set on Mars but marketing think 'oooh, I think 'Mars' in the title might put people off' then there's going to be trouble.

As mentioned above, the cack-handed marketing meant people were talking down about the film well before it opened – that negative word of mouth killed the hype.

*edit* IIRC, the director didn't do the film any favours with how they conducted publicity interviews.

[Ignatius_S]

...Mario was hardly my favourite thing ever - how could it be with Samus Aran on the scene - but I was still excited to see it. I couldn't quite wrap my head around what I was seeing. This wasn't some weird knock off, this was supposed to the real thing, so I really tried to roll with it. I actually succeeded to some degree somehow. There was just a part of my brain that wouldn't allow me to think it was shit which I suppose is some minor perk of being a child...

There was a bit of discussion recently - http://www.cookdandbombd.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=53924.30 – condensed version: people sign on to do a film because of a script, which then gets changed.

[Dr Rock]

I saw John Carter with an open mind; I think it was dull and would have flopped just like wiki-wiki Wild, Wild West, even with a better marketing campaign. It may have made a bit more, but would have even seen as an even bigger turkey. It didn't work as a movie. Plot: weak, acting: poor, dialogue: flat, special effect: seen it all before.

The Shittest Blockbuster I've seen lately is Suicide Squad, or worse, that last Fantastic Four - I really don't know what they were trying to do there apart from keep the rights reverting to Marvel.

[Shit Good Nose]

Hot, but with f*ck all in the way of name-recognition.

Yes, I can understand how Alex[nb]Alexander[/nb] is such a difficult name compared with Stellan[nb]insert appropriate smiley faced emoticon here[/nb].

I really don't know what they were trying to do there apart from keep the rights reverting to Marvel.

It's happened twice before with the Roger Corman and German(?) ones - third time's the charm.

[doppelkorn]

Re. Super Mario Bros.

Co-director Rocky Morton reflected on the movie in 2016 as a "harrowing" experience. He explained that he and Annabel Jenkel, along with the rest of the cast, agreed to make the movie based on the script originally written by Dick Clement and Ian La Frenais, which focused on Mario and Luigi's complicated but loving family dynamic that they had developed in the absence of their parents.

What the....

[Shit Good Nose]

complicated but loving family dynamic that they had developed in the absence of their parents

"It is NOT okay to be fucking.  YOU ARE BROTHERS!!!!!!!!!!"


Mind you, a Clement and Frenais script - it would have just ended up being a sitcom on film, wouldn't it.  And probably without anything from the games.


Another "fucking hell!" -

The suggestion for a film based on the Super Mario Brothers was first put forward by Roland Joffé during a script meeting at his production company Lightmotive.

Roland Joffe.  Director of The Killing Fields, The Mission and Fat Man and Little Boy.