lilmac Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 What boxoffice run disappointed you? Either because it did better than it should have, vice versa, etc... Norbit and Yes Man piss me off to this day. I hate it when a movie stops at the cusp of $100/$200 million. Ugh. Other movies have gotten closer to $100m than those two but I was specifically rooting for them and it just...didn't...happen. http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=norbit.htm http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=yesman.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceroll Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 Shouldn't this be the most disappointing box office run then? My least favorite would be like 80% of the movies released every week because they're in limited release and I've never even heard of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sims Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 In the same vein as the OP, Gnomeo and Juliet's run INFURIATES ME. I was ACTUALLY angry when BOM announced its run was closing. One more fucking week would really have killed them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilmac Posted July 4, 2012 Author Share Posted July 4, 2012 Wow, you're right. http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=daily&id=gnomeoandjuliet.htmI wonder if the director pissed Disney upper management off - so much that they didn't want him to reach the $100m mark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jawa Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 (edited) A combination of Princess and the Frog and Tangled. The two runs combined sent a message that 2D animation isn't popular anymore. Let's completely ignore the fact that Disney had been churning out crap the entirety of the 2000s*, Princess and the Frog's underperformance was attributed to 1) Hand-drawn animation, 2) Being geared towards girls, and 3) Having a black Disney princess. While I'm sure these played some role, I think it's much harder to succeed when your last 8 or so films were horrid. Princess and the Frog wasn't a perfect movie, but it was a damn good tribute to the musicals of the 90s. It took some risks that, in my opinion, paid off. Tangled did nothing, I repeat, nothing that other Disney films hadn't done better. Female villain? Maleficent. "I want" song? Part of Your World or Out There. Romance? Beauty and the Beast. The songs are completely forgettable, and as a fan of Alan Menken, it pains me to say that. You know its bad when Randy Newman can write more memorable songs. I wish the two's box office grosses had been switched. *Lilo and Stitch is the exception, but is still itself a mixed bag. Edited July 4, 2012 by Jawa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Gittes Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 First of all, box office flops that were great movies - Zodiac, Speed Racer, Fantastic Mr. Fox, Grindhouse, just to name a few from the past several years. Secondly, and similarly - terrible movies that made a lot of money, especially if they had decent legs - I was never really depressed about Twilight grosses, for example, but to see trainwrecks like Alice in Wonderland, TF2, first two Alvin movies make so much money was unfortunate. What has been truly infuriating me in the past several years is some of the foreign grosses - I have nothing against domestic runs of AWE & OST, 2012, PoP, Battleship etc. because the first two both declined from their predecessors, 2012 dropped like a rock and PoP flopped, yet the way international audiences ate that shit up like ice-cream sure didn't paint a very good picture of their taste. It's really ironic when you come across someone here in Russia, or in Europe calling Americans dumb for producing such terrible movies, yet 75% of their grosses comes from overseas.And thirdly, yes, I hate when movies close in on milestones only to miss them in the end, as well. It was particularly disappointing with The Social Network recently, and during those two months when Tangled was around $199m (it passed $200m in the end, of course, but only after everyone was ready to accept its failure). Gnomeo wasn't infuriating, but it was just fucking ridiculous. I'll never understand what made Disney do that, for me the best explanation is that it was just a joke from them. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bitcher Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 Secondly, and similarly - terrible movies that made a lot of money, especially if they had decent legs - I was never really depressed about Twilight grosses, for example, but to see trainwrecks like Alice in Wonderland, TF2, first two Alvin movies make so much money was unfortunate. What has been truly infuriating me in the past several years is some of the foreign grosses - I have nothing against domestic runs of AWE & OST, 2012, PoP, Battleship etc. because the first two both declined from their predecessors, 2012 dropped like a rock and PoP flopped, yet the way international audiences ate that shit up like ice-cream sure didn't paint a very good picture of their taste. It's really ironic when you come across someone here in Russia, or in Europe calling Americans dumb for producing such terrible movies, yet 75% of their grosses comes from overseas.Couldn't agree more with this sentiment. In fact, I'm pissed that OS markets are becoming more and more dominant, as Hollywood flicks made for worldwide appeal usually suck, since any kind of depth in their writing may be turn-off for this or that kind of foreign audience which doesn't get particular reference or subtext due to living in a different cultural environment and as a result, said movies are pretty much bound to cater to the lowest common denominator. Also I get an impression that most foreign markets it's primarily families with children going to the movies and you can't really count on kids to have a discerning taste and not just keep slurping up one shitty sequel after the other. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishstick Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Shriekapoo,duh! A billion dollar flick with a Shitto in it? Worst. Run.Ever. But it`s falling like a rock now. Woo-hoo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BK007 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 The thread started because you were unhappy Norbit didn't make it to $100m?If anything it's that Norbit made any money at all. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilmac Posted July 11, 2012 Author Share Posted July 11, 2012 I really wanted- Unbreakable to make more $$. It was a fantastic movie and remains one of the best superhero movies out there.- Avengers to hit 3x multiplier. Looks like it'll fall a little short. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moviedweeb Posted July 18, 2012 Share Posted July 18, 2012 (edited) First of all, box office flops that were great movies - Zodiac, Speed Racer, Fantastic Mr. Fox, Grindhouse, just to name a few from the past several years. Secondly, and similarly - terrible movies that made a lot of money, especially if they had decent legs - I was never really depressed about Twilight grosses, for example, but to see trainwrecks like Alice in Wonderland, TF2, first two Alvin movies make so much money was unfortunate. What has been truly infuriating me in the past several years is some of the foreign grosses - I have nothing against domestic runs of AWE & OST, 2012, PoP, Battleship etc. because the first two both declined from their predecessors, 2012 dropped like a rock and PoP flopped, yet the way international audiences ate that shit up like ice-cream sure didn't paint a very good picture of their taste. It's really ironic when you come across someone here in Russia, or in Europe calling Americans dumb for producing such terrible movies, yet 75% of their grosses comes from overseas.And thirdly, yes, I hate when movies close in on milestones only to miss them in the end, as well. It was particularly disappointing with The Social Network recently, and during those two months when Tangled was around $199m (it passed $200m in the end, of course, but only after everyone was ready to accept its failure). Gnomeo wasn't infuriating, but it was just fucking ridiculous. I'll never understand what made Disney do that, for me the best explanation is that it was just a joke from them.I know there was bad blood between Disney and Elton John. That would be very surprising if they stopped tracking to spite him but who knows. Edited July 18, 2012 by Clavius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moviedweeb Posted July 18, 2012 Share Posted July 18, 2012 The Green Hornet was not very good but I liked cast and was pulling for it to cross $100m dom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vc2002 Posted July 18, 2012 Share Posted July 18, 2012 Shriekapoo,duh! A billion dollar flick with a Shitto in it? Worst. Run.Ever. But it`s falling like a rock now. Woo-hoo.Fishnets' ability to turn to any subject into ROTK bashing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
druv10 Posted July 18, 2012 Share Posted July 18, 2012 I really wanted - Unbreakable to make more $$. It was a fantastic movie and remains one of the best superhero movies out there. - Avengers to hit 3x multiplier. Looks like it'll fall a little short. Don't worry, TA will hit 3x. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accursed Arachnid!™ Posted July 18, 2012 Share Posted July 18, 2012 SM3. Not because it deserved more, but to watch it just drop and drop and drop...it was heartbreaking for me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AASixteen16 Posted July 18, 2012 Share Posted July 18, 2012 Friday the 13th, there's Twilight frontloadedness, and HP frontloadedness, but F13's is fuckin' ridiculous. It made 40/66, which is just a REPULSIVE multiplier. IDK why it bothers me it just does.TF3's 97M OW. It's so close to $100M that Par. should have just PR'd it like they did 2 years back.Same with IM1's OW. $98M. PR didn't "exist" back then, but they could have fudged it a bit to get it over that magical number.These are not runs, just OW pet peeves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moviedweeb Posted July 18, 2012 Share Posted July 18, 2012 (edited) Friday the 13th, there's Twilight frontloadedness, and HP frontloadedness, but F13's is fuckin' ridiculous. It made 40/66, which is just a REPULSIVE multiplier. IDK why it bothers me it just does.TF3's 97M OW. It's so close to $100M that Par. should have just PR'd it like they did 2 years back.Same with IM1's OW. $98M. PR didn't "exist" back then, but they could have fudged it a bit to get it over that magical number.These are not runs, just OW pet peeves.Iron Man 1 was innitially estimated at $100m but you can't lie about actuals. Edited July 19, 2012 by Clavius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackO Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Deathly Hallows 2. After midnights I thought 100M OD may be coming. Nope. Then huge drop on Saturday made Sunday boring. Then huge 2nd weekend drop rendered it irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webslinger Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Superman ReturnsEven though its huge under-performance at the box office gave vindication to everyone at the BOM forums who thought Pirates 2 would make more money, I would have loved to see the sequel that seemed like a foregone conclusion before Returns came out. I would have been much more excited for another Bryan Singer Superman than I am for the upcoming Zack Snyder one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sims Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 TDKR is looking like it might be a lot of people's answers. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
