rb02 Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 In Time nearly quadrupled the budget WW. Couldn't be that, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretty reckless Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Red riding hood was a FLOP. It basically copied the Twilight style and it grossed 37 million DOM, LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cochofles Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) Sometimes films actually exceed their budgets, and still fail to make any sort of impact. An actor's name is not put above the title of a 40 million dollar film so it grosses 50 million, you know what I'm saying? They expect 'stars' to draw in large crowds. Amanda is being groomed and positioned by studios as the next box office sweetheart, a girl-next-door with cross-gender appeal, but it's not working, clearly. Even in sappy romantic dramas, she is 1 out of 2. (Dear John's success, by the way, had more to do with Channing Tatum's appeal to teenage girls than anything else) Edited February 26, 2012 by Cochofles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rb02 Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Red riding hood was a FLOP. It basically copied the Twilight style and it grossed 37 million DOM, LOL.The budget was only 42M (I was wrong when I mentioned earlier that it exceeded the DOM budget). It hit 89M WW, and then Warner Bros. or Box Office Mojo, not sure which one, stopped calculating its WW, even though it still had a few markets. Ultimately, it probably came close to 100M, but even at 89M, again, that's doubling the budget, and then some, and that is just NOT a flop. But perhaps I just have a bad definition of the word "flop". I thought it was sort of defined as a movie as that LOST money, not a movie that MADE money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rb02 Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Sometimes films actually exceed their budgets, and still fail to make any sort of impact. An actor's name is not put above the title of a 40 million dollar film so it grosses 50 million, you know what I'm saying? They expect 'stars' to draw in large crowds. Amanda is being groomed and positioned by studios as the next box office sweetheart, a girl-next-door with cross-gender appeal, but it's not working, clearly. Even in sappy romantic dramas, she is 1 out of 2. (Dear John's success, by the way, had more to do with Channing Tatum's appeal to teenage girls than anything else) I agree with you. I did think she was excellent in Chloe. Thought that she was terrible in RRH, though that was probably a case of her adequately performing her role as set forth by the director. I'll blame Hardwicke for that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyky Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Her movies do well enough for her age. She's only 26yo and she's headlining movies on her own. Even though they are not big hits, the studios see the potential. She's very talented imo and has great potential to improve and become a respected actress. I said she may become the new Meryl. And she was great in Mamma Mia. Very charming performance, But this forum thinks Kristen Stewart is a good actress. LMAO Can you imagine her pulling off Amanda's role in mamma mia? a joke... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretty reckless Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Who the hell said KS is a good actress? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FilmBuff Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Not one person stood out in Mean Girls. It had a well-rounded cast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecstasy Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) Agh, Gone flopped. But on the bright side, Amanda Seyfried is probably the only actress her age who studios trust to headline movies on her own on the regular. Older, more proven actresses need male co-stars. She has talent and her box office appeal, while limited for now, can expand. I'm gonna use big words, but she may be the next Meryl Streep, but with more BO pull. She is talented enough in her own way and I guess she does have some appeal but she is not even on Meryl Streep's level in box office pull or in terms of talent. It's not like the films she makes call for any nuanced dramatic acting. The next Meryl Streep? Nah. But she is carving a nice little niche for herself in the business in her own lane. Edited February 26, 2012 by ECSTASY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyky Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 She is talented enough in her own way and I guess she does have some appeal but she is not even on Meryl Streep's level in box office pull or in terms of talent. It's not like the films she makes call for any nuanced dramatic acting. The next Meryl Streep? Nah. But she is carving a nice little niche for herself in the business in her own lane.At 26 yo, Meryl had her first movie role (a voice part). It's a little crazy. I didn't even know she started so late.All i'm saying is that Amanda S has potential. I see talent. That's all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incarnadine Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 When Seyfried was on Letterman didn't she say when she signed on for Gone it was supposed to be a small independant film?Amanda certainly is talented enough, but she doesn't seem to be interested in being a big star so she makes some odd choices for movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockNrollaDIM Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Agh, Gone flopped. But on the bright side, Amanda Seyfried is probably the only actress her age who studios trust to headline movies on her own on the regular. Older, more proven actresses need male co-stars. She has talent and her box office appeal, while limited for now, can expand. I'm gonna use big words, but she may be the next Meryl Streep, but with more BO pull. That's the craziest thing I've read in a while, are you her agent? Her acting isn't even remotely close to being as good as Streep. Also, I'm not sure how much studios are going to let her headline movies anymore now.I hope she has success too. FTF is right that she's not the greatest actress but she's really likable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Craig Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 So early on the knee-jerk reaction by those who see a value in being "first" proclaimed Red Tails a flop. That film is going to be a disapointment but not a flop. Then those same posters jumped on Ghost Rider Spirit of Vengeance and that is not collapsing. Finally! Third times the charm though. It does seem Gone, opening at #8 with $5m is indeed a FLOP. Unless the budget is $15m but it's not posted. Gone looks to indeed be the first wide opener to be a flop out of the gate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AniNate Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 So early on the knee-jerk reaction by those who see a value in being "first" proclaimed Red Tails a flop. That film is going to be a disapointment but not a flop. Then those same posters jumped on Ghost Rider Spirit of Vengeance and that is not collapsing. Red Tails was a flop and Ghost Rider is collapsing 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Craig Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Red Tails was a flop and Ghost Rider is collapsingNo and No.If Red tails was a flop it wouldn't have $48m on a $58m budget. That's not a flop.If GR had collapsed it's drop would be 70%+ and finished #8/9.Some don't understand how flop works based on budget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichWS Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) Ghost Rider will fall another 50% next weekend. What do you want to call it? A "gentle underpeformer"? It's been falling apart every day since last weekend. Edited February 26, 2012 by RichWS 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AniNate Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 No and No.If Red tails was a flop it wouldn't have $48m on a $58m budget. That's not a flop.Yes it is. It's not in the black, therefore it's a flop. Movies that do finish in the black but still lower than expectations are "disappointments". 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bitcher Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Gone looks to indeed be the first wide opener to be a flop out of the gate.Haywire.Yes, I know, it's so easy to forget them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AniNate Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Haywire had terrible legs. I don't think it was a flop out of the gate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egoplant Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Flop is based on budget, not based on predictions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
