Joel M Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 The most glaring omission is Illumination. Their brand popularity is huge atm. I also wonder if the Revenant qualifies for this list. It was a 2015 release but by this time last year it hadn't opened wide yet and most people were expecting it to barely break even if at all. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filmlover Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 It was a great year for indies: Eye in the Sky, Hello My Name is Doris, Love & Friendship, Moonlight, Manchester by the Sea all did great given their confines. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveJaros Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 11 hours ago, jandrew said: Losers: - Batman vs Superman I just can't call a film that made $330m DOM and almost $800m WW a "loser". It surely made a lot of money for WB, and it sets the stage for future DCU movies. Call it "disappointing" if you want and I'll agree, because its a pretty steep drop off from what the previous two Batman movies did, but that doesn't make it a loser. Alice 2 and the BFG were losers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxmoser3 Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 Would Star Trek:Beyond be considered a loser? Since it failed to make $350 million worldwide. Paramount is the main loser of 2016, with only 4 hits for them and 6-7(Jack Reacher failed to break-even stateside)flops they are in some trouble. Bankability for actors: Winner: Ben Affleck two hit films one being Batman V. Superman being his highest grossing yet, and The Accountant made a solid amount considering it wasn't an Oscar or award nominated film it did fine for an R-rated action thriller. Loser: Melissa McCarthy had a decent past few years with films like Identity Thief, The Heat, Spy, and Tammy making very solid numbers. But not so much with two of her films in 2016, The Boss did ok with its $29 million budget and made over $70 million worldwide but it was by far her lowest-grossing film with her as the lead role of the film. Then the summer Ghostbusters which had the highest grossing start for the actress, but died off quickly, although it made $128 million, it failed to recoup with its $144 million budget, and even with overseas and with what Sony was expecting to be a sucessful "Summer tentpole" it's easy to say it was a loser. Winners Horror: 2016 was the biggest year for horror yet! With 4 of them making over $70 million domestic, and one over $65 million, and one at $55 million. Horror also did sucessful overseas with several making $100 million worldwide and so on. Toss-up R-rated comedies: only Bad Moms was the R-rated comedy made $100 million domestic this year, which is the lowest in over a decade. But Sausage Party, Neighbors 2, Mike & Dave, Dirty Grandpa, and How To Be Single(forgot Why Him, and Office Christmas Party)managed to make money back. While Brothers Grimsby, Popstar, Keanu, and Bad Santa 2 flopped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jandrew Posted January 7, 2017 Author Share Posted January 7, 2017 2 hours ago, SteveJaros said: I just can't call a film that made $330m DOM and almost $800m WW a "loser". It surely made a lot of money for WB, and it sets the stage for future DCU movies. Call it "disappointing" if you want and I'll agree, because its a pretty steep drop off from what the previous two Batman movies did, but that doesn't make it a loser. Alice 2 and the BFG were losers. Go read why I called it a loser and youll understand. Its a loser, sorry. It had "skies the limit potential" and squandered it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babz06 Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 (edited) I think BvS is a loser too, everyone expected this to be a billion dollar grosser. It's shitty legs were completely shocking. Expectations are now so low for every subsequent DC film until they find a winner. Edited January 7, 2017 by babz06 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jandrew Posted January 7, 2017 Author Share Posted January 7, 2017 (edited) 9 hours ago, PPZVGOS said: How on earth is Batman v Superman (WW gross: $873.3M) a loser while Ghostbusters (WW gross: $229M) is mixed? BvS cost $250M while Ghostbusters cost $150M Are yall actually reading my post? Matter of fact are you even reading the OP? This is not a list based on grosses. I made it pretty clear in my post why I considered them what I did. 6 hours ago, baumer said: Shallows is definitely a winner. I don't want to edit the list, but yeah I definitely see the argument for winner from you guys. 6 hours ago, MCKillswitch123 said: C'mon man, Storks deserves to be a "kinda winner". Yes, it had a very disappointing OW (undeservedly so), but its legs were amazing. And Ice Age 5 shouldn't get the benefit of the doubt for being Ice Age 5 - all of the previous ones had grossed at least 100M+. Even WW, it did less than half of IA3 and 4, and it's actually the lowest grossing of the franchise (less than even the original IN 2002). We were pretty much expecting this from Ice Age. Storks on the other hand had some real confidence thanks to the previous talking animal successes, and those DAMN CUTE BABIES. 8 hours ago, forg said: Sully for me is straight up winner in the box office (but as an awards bait it's a loser) Kung Fu Panda 3 is not on the loser for me as well, over $500M box office worldwide with 145M budget. It also did quite well for a January release. It also had solid reviews and helped Dreamworks' road to recovery Should be included in the winners list as well is Illumination with two box office smashes this year with original material. I didn't call KFP3, Star Trek, Bourne, or XMen losers on their own, they did just fine on their own, just said they lost in bringing the franchise back compared to the previous entries. I know everyone is hollering about Illumination, but we all pretty much saw both Pets and Sing coming. Sure they're definitely a winner, but I didn't it was headline worthy enough to write about. Edited January 7, 2017 by jandrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jandrew Posted January 7, 2017 Author Share Posted January 7, 2017 Let me make a couple things clear: 1. This is not a compilation based solely on grosses. That's too easy. 2. Not a best of the year/worst of the year list either. That's too easy. 3. I couldn't include every single thing. That's too easy. I wanted to write about what I felt were highlights. I bet none of you were expecting Madea. Illumination is not a highlight for me because all of us saw big things coming out of Pets and Sing. Trolls and DreamWorks on the other hand, we were leaving for dead at one point last year. Please continue to offer other movies you felt should be highlighted though. 4. This is not meant to be so literal. Yes BvS is not a loser in life as it made $800M WW and sold a ton of merchandise, but based on my criteria, yes, it failed horribly. Read my post and you'll see my reasoning on everything, and you'll notice the overall tone that I was going for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonwo Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 Sully should be a winner, over $200m WW in a $60m budget even with Hanks and Eastwood is a win. New Line should be a winner with a successful summer with Conjuring 2, Me Before You, Central Intelligence etc Kinda winner should be Bridget Jones, while it flopped stateside, it was a winner OS especially in its native U.K. considering it was 12 years since the last film 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grey ghost Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 2 hours ago, Maxmoser3 said: Would Star Trek:Beyond be considered a loser? Since it failed to make $350 million worldwide. Paramount is the main loser of 2016, with only 4 hits for them and 6-7(Jack Reacher failed to break-even stateside)flops they are in some trouble. Bankability for actors: Winner: Ben Affleck two hit films one being Batman V. Superman being his highest grossing yet, and The Accountant made a solid amount considering it wasn't an Oscar or award nominated film it did fine for an R-rated action thriller. Loser: Melissa McCarthy had a decent past few years with films like Identity Thief, The Heat, Spy, and Tammy making very solid numbers. But not so much with two of her films in 2016, The Boss did ok with its $29 million budget and made over $70 million worldwide but it was by far her lowest-grossing film with her as the lead role of the film. Then the summer Ghostbusters which had the highest grossing start for the actress, but died off quickly, although it made $128 million, it failed to recoup with its $144 million budget, and even with overseas and with what Sony was expecting to be a sucessful "Summer tentpole" it's easy to say it was a loser. Winners Horror: 2016 was the biggest year for horror yet! With 4 of them making over $70 million domestic, and one over $65 million, and one at $55 million. Horror also did sucessful overseas with several making $100 million worldwide and so on. Toss-up R-rated comedies: only Bad Moms was the R-rated comedy made $100 million domestic this year, which is the lowest in over a decade. But Sausage Party, Neighbors 2, Mike & Dave, Dirty Grandpa, and How To Be Single(forgot Why Him, and Office Christmas Party)managed to make money back. While Brothers Grimsby, Popstar, Keanu, and Bad Santa 2 flopped. Star Trek Beyond only made 350 m WW? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCKillswitch123 Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 @jandrew Disagree about Ice Age. I certainly didn't expect it to do under 100M DOM, and while maybe a lot of people did, its actual under 70M DOM result makes an accurate prediction a bit unrrealistic to exist. It should've at least legged it to the century mark, but not even that. Though that's nothing compared to how much it bombed OS as well. Nobody expected it to fall THAT much from the predecessors and grossing only slightly more than the '02 movie rather than blazing by it. And hell, IA5 is a movie about talking animals as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jandrew Posted January 7, 2017 Author Share Posted January 7, 2017 (edited) 16 minutes ago, MCKillswitch123 said: @jandrew Disagree about Ice Age. I certainly didn't expect it to do under 100M DOM, and while maybe a lot of people did, its actual under 70M DOM result makes an accurate prediction a bit unrrealistic to exist. It should've at least legged it to the century mark, but not even that. Though that's nothing compared to how much it bombed OS as well. Nobody expected it to fall THAT much from the predecessors and grossing only slightly more than the '02 movie rather than blazing by it. And hell, IA5 is a movie about talking animals as well. I'm sorry, but like I said, Ice Age wasn't headline worthy to me. It was clear Fox has milked this dry and was just fondling the teet for fun at this point. I get your point though. It's a loser in life, but for my list it's not noteworthy. 17 minutes ago, Jonwo said: Sully should be a winner, over $200m WW in a $60m budget even with Hanks and Eastwood is a win. New Line should be a winner with a successful summer with Conjuring 2, Me Before You, Central Intelligence etc Kinda winner should be Bridget Jones, while it flopped stateside, it was a winner OS especially in its native U.K. considering it was 12 years since the last film It would be too easy to add New Line. I couldn't and didn't want to add every single thing that had a good gross or went in the black. Central Intelligence had a fine run, nice RT and reception, and was pretty funny, but it wasn't anything new to me. It held the role of that one comedy that always breaks out every summer. I felt Conjuring 2 did its job. I can see the argument for Sully. I originally had it in full winner, but bumped it down after I looked at it more. Edited January 7, 2017 by jandrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCKillswitch123 Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 (edited) 13 minutes ago, jandrew said: I'm sorry, but like I said, Ice Age wasn't headline worthy to me. It was clear Fox has milked this dry and was just fondling the teet for fun at this point. I get your point though. It's a loser in life, but for my list it's not noteworthy. Alright, but I still do think that Ice Age was headline worthy. Yes, Alice 2, TMNT 2 and all these bombastic sequels had came out, and Fox marketed this things poorly and all, but there's a difference between sequels to live action movies that nobody asked for, and sequels to animated movies that no one asked for. In theory, the animated movie will still have better legs, and Ice Age being one of the biggest animated franchises had to obligation to do much better than it did. Hell, Angry Birds had very mediocre legs for animation and poor wom, and still crossed 100M DOM. Plus, w/so many talking animals movies overperforming, Ice Age just seemed like a natural to me. Though, again, its DOM failure is incomparable to its OS stumble, which was just... laughable. Still, you believe in what you want to, and it's your list at the end of the day bro. Go at it. Edited January 7, 2017 by MCKillswitch123 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jandrew Posted January 7, 2017 Author Share Posted January 7, 2017 (edited) Look, I'm sorry, but I've said what I had to say about Ice Age. Edited January 7, 2017 by jandrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveJaros Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, jandrew said: Go read why I called it a loser and youll understand. Its a loser, sorry. It had "skies the limit potential" and squandered it. I read it, and calling BvS a "loser" still doesn't make sense to me. Your reasoning isn't convincing. My term, "disappointment", is IMO far more accurate. "Loser" should be reserved for films that were far more of a box office bust, like the ones I mentioned. Edited January 7, 2017 by SteveJaros Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxmoser3 Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 2 hours ago, grey ghost said: Star Trek Beyond only made 350 m WW? That's what Paramount wished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxmoser3 Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 Delaying films is a loser. With the exception of Kung Fu Panda 3, and The Conjuring 2, mostly everything that was supposed to come out in 2015 that was moved to 2016 did ok to poor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marveldcfox Posted January 7, 2017 Share Posted January 7, 2017 ass creed is a loser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jandrew Posted January 7, 2017 Author Share Posted January 7, 2017 (edited) 44 minutes ago, SteveJaros said: I read it, and calling BvS a "loser" still doesn't make sense to me. Your reasoning isn't convincing. My term, "disappointment", is IMO far more accurate. "Loser" should be reserved for films that were far more of a box office bust, like the ones I mentioned. Well like I said, this isnt solely about box office. Edited January 7, 2017 by jandrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Community Manager Water Bottle Posted January 7, 2017 Community Manager Share Posted January 7, 2017 How is Dr. Strange not a winner? (not a serious post but felt like there should be some faux marvel outrage to meet the DC outrage) 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
