Terrible films and box office disasters

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
92,903
Location
Centreback
Most films are a bit shit these days but there have been some truly terrible films over the years some of which have done amazingly badly at the box office.

I'll start with 3 Kevin Kostner films

Prince Of Thieves (Robin Hood with a Yank accent :lol: )
Waterworld (amazingly this rubbish eventually broke even)
The Postman (Cost $80 million and only took $17.5 Million)

He even took a very good book about golf and destroyed it.
 
Apparently a film called Zyzzyx Road cost $1.2 million to make and took a total of $30 after only getting released in 1 cinema :lol:
 
Heaven's Gate is always mentioned as the biggest box office disaster in that it cost $40 mill and only took $4mill but there are now films that have lost far more apparently.

Still, to be fair, this film did end United Artists as an independent company, which is quite impressive.
 
Pluto Nash was fecking awful, cost over 100 mil to make as well
 
Flyboys which I recently watched and was fecking awful
 
The Island, which I thought was pretty good but cost 122mil and didnt clear 36 mil
 
Kingdom of Heaven
Stealth
Speed II
Windtalkers
 
Wibble said:
Heaven's Gate is always mentioned as the biggest box office disaster in that it cost $40 mill and only took $4mill but there are now films that have lost far more apparently.

Still, to be fair, this film did end United Artists as an independent company, which is quite impressive.
Click to expand...

I've seen that mentioned as the worst film of all time.
 
Alex said:
Pluto Nash was fecking awful, cost over 100 mil to make as well
Click to expand...

It was an utter disaster but apparently 5 other films have lost even more.

Alex said:
Catwoman
Click to expand...

Cost $100 mill and took $40 mill.

Alex said:
Gigli
Click to expand...

Cost $54 mill and took $4 mill - I wonder what the "stars" were paid?

Alex said:
Stealth
Click to expand...

Lost $100 million apparently

R.Nilsson7 said:
Swept Away?
Click to expand...

Cost $10 mill and only took $600k
 
Doesn't the average Hollywood film cost something like 70m? Surely most films would operate at a loss
 
70 million is way high for the average, probably 35-50 mil these days depending on the genre
 
The adventures of Pluto Nash with Eddie Murphy is another one.

According to Wikipedia... Its budget was estimated at (U.S.) $100 million, with marketing costs of $20 million and the domestic box office (of which the studio typically receives about half) was $4,420,080 and $2,683,893 (overseas) for a total worldwide gross of $7,103,973.
 
Melbourne Red said:
Doesn't the average Hollywood film cost something like 70m? Surely most films would operate at a loss
Click to expand...

Sounds high to me.

And films now often claw their way to profitability through worldwide and DVD sales etc

The Golden Compass didn't do that well in the US but took a shed load of dosh elsewhere even before DVD sales.
 
Actually I think the average is closer to 40m. I suppose worldwide sales probably would bump the overall profit up considerably
 
KeyserSoze said:
The adventures of Pluto Nash with Eddie Murphy is another one.

According to Wikipedia... Its budget was estimated at (U.S.) $100 million, with marketing costs of $20 million and the domestic box office (of which the studio typically receives about half) was $4,420,080 and $2,683,893 (overseas) for a total worldwide gross of $7,103,973.
Click to expand...


5 films have done even worse in terms of gross $ lost.

1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6) Pluto Nash
 
Wibble said:
Apparently a film called Zyzzyx Road cost $1.2 million to make and took a total of $30 after only getting released in 1 cinema :lol:
Click to expand...

Only opened in one theater (Highland Village Park Theater in Dallas, Texas) ran for six days, and amassed a final total of $20 (originally tallied as $30, but $10 was refunded to a member of the film's crew who paid to see the movie) in box office taking

:lol:

$10 was refunded
 
Three people paid to see it and one was a member of the crew :lol:
 
Do you reckon the other two cnuts saw it on the same day?

If so, do you reckon they sat together?
 
They released it to fullfill the classification as an independent non-straight-to-DVD film with a budget of under $2.5 mill so that they could distribute it overseas and then use that "success" to get it distributed in the US. It has taken over $300k now but still hasn't been released in the US.
 
Don't know how much it took but Saw IV was absolutely fecking dire. Even worse that Catwoman.
 
I thought Prince of Thieves was successful at the box office.

Anyway I like it, dodgy accent and all.
 
I don't know if it lost money but it was however one of the worst films ever made.
 
The worst film I ever saw was Lady In The Water (think that's what it's called!). About some fecking woman who lands in some guy's pool in his back garden, I don't know whether she's supposed to be a fairy or a mermaid but anyways....it's fecking shit so avoid at all costs :mad:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.