Film Why are many blockbuster movies failing at the box office?

Some of these films should never have been greenlit. They make no sense on paper. Harrison Ford has been a mainstay in Summer Blockbuster fare for decades. He deserves his credit for the work and multiple franchises he has been a part of his whole career.

Now lets be real. Who is trying to see an 81 year old Indiana Jones as the main character? You are already limiting the experience. Resorting to CGI de aging, and other siliness to hide what he used to do and the reality of what he can do now. It was always insane to throw that amount of money at a film and not have him firmly passing the torch as it were.

I would say the same thing about anyone. They should know that was not going to work.

Flash was the same thing imo. Ezra Miller issues aside. The previous entries of that character fare well, BVS and Justice league. The performance of that specific character as well did not stand out. Why in the world would anyone expect that the solo film would do well? It was born to flop.

The Tom Cruise comparison to Harrison I would argue Tom still pulls off insane stunts etc and is 20 years younger still. Tom Cruise has done excellent more drama heavy movies as well I think he will be able to transition as he ages to films that allow him to still be a draw.

I also have to echo some of the theatre experience comments. Last movie I saw was Guardians of the Galaxy 3. I pointedly went to a brand new theare 30 minutes away at matinee on my work from home day. So I dont have to be bothered with a bunch of people. It was so nice. I used to love a packed theater and the experince with others laughing and clapping etc. Now I find it annoying.
 
Salt Bailly said:
Apparently needs to make $800-850m before the profits start rolling in: https://www.thewrap.com/fast-x-box-office-preview/

3 x the budget used to be the general rule, not sure if that still applies in a post-Covid world.
Click to expand...
Can you read the full article? I'm wondering what costs come in top of the US$340M production budget, since @Annihilate Now! said marketing costs won't exceed US$150-200M.
Cloud7 said:
I never understand people's problems with the Transformers movies. When I go to see one of them, I am paying to watch giant robots fighting. I don't care for the quality of acting, or the plot, or cinematography or the depth or whatever self flagellating thing movie critics (and I am referring to the amateur ones who criticize everything as well) go on about. I go there to see giant robots fighting, and that is what I get. I leave as a satisfied patron.
Click to expand...
Actually, you get very little of that. Pacific Rim had a ton of giant robots fighting, but the Transformers movies really just had a few minutes of it (or in the first two, anyway; I didn't see the rest), and usually choreographed and shot in a way that I have no idea what's what.
BusbyMalone said:
I used to love reading Roger Ebert. I used to disagree with many of his reviews, but it wasn't the point, really. Fundamentally, he was just a great writer who happened to write about movies. And he did it in such a way that was convincing and honest, even if you disagreed. But yeah, maybe a discussion for another thread!
Click to expand...
@Wing Attack Plan R might want to have a chat with you about this. ;)
 
Last edited:
Cheimoon said:
Can you read the full article? I'm wondering what costs come in top of the US$340 production budget, since @Annihilate Now! said marketing costs won't exceed US$150-200M.

Actually, you get very little of that. Pacific Rim had a ton of giant robots fighting, but the Transformers movies really just had a few minutes of it (or in the first two, anyway; I didn't see the rest), and usually choreographed and shot in a way that I have no idea what's what.

@Wing Attack Plan R might want to have a chat with you about this. ;)
Click to expand...
Indeed!
 
Film quality is dire. Far too many superhero films has stalled the industry of creativity. Last film I watched at the cinema was The Northman and barely anyone was in the cinema so it made it a fairly enjoyable experience.

But I've struggled with films since then. They're just all pretty bloody shit and the prices required to pay to watch a film at the cinema just makes it not worth it on the whole.
 
Oversaturation and ticket prices.

Even in places where ticket prices remain low, snacks etc are not.

Costs a family 100 quid to see a movie.
 
It has become sad how everyone kept following the same formula. Additions to multiverses and endless reboots. Very rarely do we see something standalone with new characters... Like Matrix was back in the day or V for Vendetta.

Anyway, that might have been interesting ten years ago but everyone is bored now.

Also, how anyone thought that an 80 year old Indiana Jones was a good idea is beyond me.
 
Cheimoon said:
Can you read the full article? I'm wondering what costs come in top of the US$340M production budget, since @Annihilate Now! said marketing costs won't exceed US$150-200M.
Click to expand...
I did a little digging. Profits need to basically double the overall production and marketing costs, as half the box office gross goes to theatres.

So if we're generous and assume the marketing costs were only 100m, they'd still be looking at $880m total gross to break even.
 
Salt Bailly said:
I did a little digging. Profits need to basically double the overall production and marketing costs, as half the box office gross goes to theatres.

So if we're generous and assume the marketing costs were only 100m, they'd still be looking at $880m total gross to break even.
Click to expand...
Ahhhh... - so that's the gap! I had totally forgotten about the theaters - and whatever/whoever else is involved in getting the finished film to be displayed in front of viewers.

So OK, if it cost US$340M (production) + $150M (marketing; TA's lower estimate), then total studio costs were $490M. That means the film then needs to make $980M for the studio to get the $490M that lets them break even. Gotcha!
 
Dirty Schwein said:
Younger generation attention span and cost of going cinema.

Most of the older people are busier, have kids, expensive bills on top of a low tolerance to idiots chatting through the film.

I recently bought a massive TV and have no reason to go cinema. I didn't even go when I had a 50". It's just so expensive and so much hassle. I only go once a month as I get 2 free tickets monthly so wanna use them up.

It doesn't help that the many films are also shit and most quickly end up on streaming services.
Click to expand...
I think what you’ve written is most of it. I’d add that the experience of seeing a movie in a theater is also not what it used to be. $80 or $90 for a family of four to see a film plus a snack, and there’s always some idiot texting or outright talking on their phone during the movie. It’s not worth the hassle.

The movies on offer don’t promise anything you can’t see at home, reboots, sequels, superheroes, it’s all low grade fare. There were some chains here (ArcLight, in Hollywood) that had reserved seating and the theaters were monitored so that no one was texting etc., but the pandemic killed them off. I have zero interest in policing teenagers in a theater, so the hassle ain’t worth it.

That said, I will shlepp out to a theater for Oppenheimer, which looks ace.
 
Last edited:
Vidyoyo said:
Re: People being less inclined to watch movies, I wonder if the demise of professional critics might be a factor?

About 10 years ago the main way you'd hear about new movies is from professional critics and many of them did a good job curating what was good and not, whether through specialist film websites or mainstream newspaper outlets.

Personally I would often tune in to things like Mark Kermode on a Radio 5, or check out the latest Peter Bradshaw review just because they usually had fairly decent opinions. I rarely do this anymore and I guess part of the reason is because we now have so many ways to gather an opinion now that it doesn't seem as valuable to get your view from an expert. I think in doing this though we've ended up giving up on what was actually a very useful way of filtering out what was good and bad.
Click to expand...
Sites like Rotten Tomatoes have democratized film criticism in a bad way. Before, a critic would be forced to do their homework. Now you get a pan or a rave from “Two Rando Chicks at the Movies”, and the critiques are little better than a Reddit thread. There are no voices among critics, although the ones I like (David Denby, Andy O’Heir, Anthony Lane) I still seek out.
 
I don't enjoy the cinema that much. Bright safety and exit lighting are a pain and idiots talking, rustling sweets and using their mobiles all put me off.
 
Hound Dog said:
It has become sad how everyone kept following the same formula. Additions to multiverses and endless reboots. Very rarely do we see something standalone with new characters... Like Matrix was back in the day or V for Vendetta.

Anyway, that might have been interesting ten years ago but everyone is bored now.

Also, how anyone thought that an 80 year old Indiana Jones was a good idea is beyond me.
Click to expand...

Harrison Ford has been phoning it in for years, too. He turns up as if he's doing everyone a favor and can't wait for it all to be over (similar to how I feel when I watch his movies). Contrast that with Cruise (who is a lot younger, to be fair), who knows how to put on a damn good show.
 
Hamnat said:
Some of these films should never have been greenlit. They make no sense on paper. Harrison Ford has been a mainstay in Summer Blockbuster fare for decades. He deserves his credit for the work and multiple franchises he has been a part of his whole career.

Now lets be real. Who is trying to see an 81 year old Indiana Jones as the main character? You are already limiting the experience. Resorting to CGI de aging, and other siliness to hide what he used to do and the reality of what he can do now. It was always insane to throw that amount of money at a film and not have him firmly passing the torch as it were.

I would say the same thing about anyone. They should know that was not going to work.

Flash was the same thing imo. Ezra Miller issues aside. The previous entries of that character fare well, BVS and Justice league. The performance of that specific character as well did not stand out. Why in the world would anyone expect that the solo film would do well? It was born to flop.

The Tom Cruise comparison to Harrison I would argue Tom still pulls off insane stunts etc and is 20 years younger still. Tom Cruise has done excellent more drama heavy movies as well I think he will be able to transition as he ages to films that allow him to still be a draw.

I also have to echo some of the theatre experience comments. Last movie I saw was Guardians of the Galaxy 3. I pointedly went to a brand new theare 30 minutes away at matinee on my work from home day. So I dont have to be bothered with a bunch of people. It was so nice. I used to love a packed theater and the experince with others laughing and clapping etc. Now I find it annoying.
Click to expand...

Is clapping at the cinema a strictly American phenomenon? I see your location is Texas, which is why I ask. I have never been to the cinema where clapping has taken place. A mixture of laughing and oohing and aahing is normal. But clapping just seems odd to me.
 
1. Way too expensive.
2. Streaming services. Get a good TV and sound system and voila, you have your very own cinema.
3. Lack of originality. Its some multiverse or reboot of old franchise or almost exact rehash of something done by someone else but under different title.
4. Movies have become too preachy and stereotypical. Most people watch movies to relax and not be preached to.
5. Not enough action movies, or at least good ones, compared to the past.
 
Eplel said:
Oversaturation and ticket prices.

Even in places where ticket prices remain low, snacks etc are not.

Costs a family 100 quid to see a movie.
Click to expand...

Yep. Why spend so much considering the turnaround to streaming services can be pretty quick now.
 
Dannn411 said:
1. Way too expensive.
2. Streaming services. Get a good TV and sound system and voila, you have your very own cinema.
3. Lack of originality. Its some multiverse or reboot of old franchise or almost exact rehash of something done by someone else but under different title.
4. Movies have become too preachy and stereotypical. Most people watch movies to relax and not be preached to.
5. Not enough action movies, or at least good ones, compared to the past.
Click to expand...
Don't worry, expendables 4 is coming.
 
Most of this thread is overthinking it. The price of going to see a movie in a theater is egregious compared to the quality you now get at home.

The rising cost is significant but what has been improved by the theater experience? Slightly better seats? I have a huge TV at home. 5.1 systems aren't that expensive if you really care about it. If you're smart you won't have teenagers ruining your viewing experience at home either.

The incentive just isn't there anymore.
 
It’s basically not good value for money. For the price of a cinema ticket alone I could have a months worth of a streaming service of my choosing.

I also don’t hang around with many people socially in real life who also are avid cinema goers so it’s not like plot points get spoilt before I get to watch them in the comfort of my own home with a cup of tea and popcorn that I don’t have to remortgage to afford.
 
Why buy a pint when they you get the same drink for a quarter of the price from Tesco?

Going to cinema for a lot of people is about the social experience. Which can admittedly be ruined by immature dickheads, but the solution to that is to watch better movies. ; - )
 
Last edited:
Salt Bailly said:
Why buy a pint when they you get the same drink for a quarter of the price from Tesco?

Going to cinema for a lot of people is about the social experience. Which can admittedly be ruined by immature dickheads, but the solution to that is to watch better movies. ;)
Click to expand...
Yes I love sitting in silence in the dark in a room full of strangers farts. The best social experience money can buy.
 
Salt Bailly said:
Why buy a pint when they you get the same drink for a quarter of the price from Tesco?

Going to cinema for a lot of people is about the social experience. Which can admittedly be ruined by immature dickheads, but the solution to that is to watch better movies. ;)
Click to expand...
This is the same people.
 
Salt Bailly said:
Why buy a pint when they you get the same drink for a quarter of the price from Tesco?

Going to cinema for a lot of people is about the social experience. Which can admittedly be ruined by immature dickheads, but the solution to that is to watch better movies. ;)
Click to expand...

Pubs arent generally doing too well either.
 
I think TV series are better than a film these days.

Hollywood ran out of ideas about 15 years ago. They've made a film out of every comic strip they can think of. They've made sequels to everything they can think of, even films that haven't had an update for years or decades got one. Then they came up with the idea of remaking films that have already been made, ruining classics left right and centre. Now they've moved onto endless superhero films to the point where everyone is sick to the back teeth, front teeth and tonsils of superhero films. Next thing will clearly be every popular video game franchise, and they'll mine that for a few years to come.

Everyone knows most films are gonna be shit, why bother? Especially when there's so much choice for entertainment available at home. They're miles too expensive, there's a cost of living crisis going on, half the time the experience is ruined by some prick fecking about with their phones or talking or whatever. It costs three trillion pounds for a coke and a bag of revels. Covid was a thing, there's loads of reasons but ultimately if you serve up a tired, shit product, people aren't gonna bother.
 
Last edited:
Streaming services very quickly get the blockbusters plus the choice of old favourites and some indie greatness. A month of that costs less than a cinema ticket to a movie that will probably be shit. People have big TVs now... No need to go cinema so they can bend you over and feck you financially.
 
HTG said:
Because the market for stupid shit movies is oversaturated and that oversaturation is finally catching up with Hollywood.
Click to expand...
Nailed it.
Hound Dog said:
It has become sad how everyone kept following the same formula. Additions to multiverses and endless reboots. Very rarely do we see something standalone with new characters... Like Matrix was back in the day or V for Vendetta.

Anyway, that might have been interesting ten years ago but everyone is bored now.

Also, how anyone thought that an 80 year old Indiana Jones was a good idea is beyond me.
Click to expand...
It's just decadent madness at that point. He had already shown up on a recent nostalgia tip in Star Wars, then Blade Runner, looking increasingly fed up and tired each time. Not to mention he was already out of it in Crystal Skull - a film that was despised and mercilessly torn apart everywhere. So it's not even the case that everything is turning to shit during the production phase of these films. They are greenlighting hackneyed productions knowing that they are likely to be awful, and banking on the wallets and good will/gullibility of dwindling fan scenes.

At this point I think they may have golden goosed it.
 
Bit of a broader question really, but people are going out less in general, aren't they? Not just a cinema thing. I mean, people are going out to pubs and clubs much less than previous generations...I think. Anecdotally it's true, anyway.

Similar to how people are saying how much cheaper it is to stay in and watch movies/tv on your streaming service, buying alcohol from supermarkets is also much cheaper than going to a pub/club. Just get a load of booze in for a fraction of the price, some food, and have a few friends/family over. Or just stay in with your S.O.
 
BusbyMalone said:
Bit of a broader question really, but people are going out less in general, aren't they? Not just a cinema thing. I mean, people are going out to pubs and clubs much less than previous generations...I think. Anecdotally it's true, anyway.

Similar to how people are saying how much cheaper it is to stay in and watch movies/tv on your streaming service, buying alcohol from supermarkets is also much cheaper than going to a pub/club. Just get a load of booze in for a fraction of the price, some food, and have a few friends/family over. Or just stay in with your S.O.
Click to expand...
Yes generally speaking people do go out less, there's a few reasons for that, the biggest ones being cost but also the smoking ban, that had a huge impact on pubs in particular
 
Personally I've grown cynical to movie marketing, so the trailers that used to get me hyped enough to go and watch The Stinky Bum II now just make me think "Oh look, Chris Pratt is a hard man alpha bro who puts his palm up in front of dinosaurs, sooooo coooool not" or "I'd rather piss in my own ear".

And then when the movie is available to stream it ends up on one of a billion different platforms that all cost £7.99 a month each, and have two things worth watching and a hundred things that are just filler shite.

Everyone is desperate to get your monthly subscription now that they're all making "content" just for the sake of having something to put on their sparsely stocked shelves. Blockbusters used to be a big event as well, all of them spaced out carefully so the market wasn't overly saturated. Now they're just slightly fancier products surrounded by a scrolling list of shite. Like seeing a three piece suit in the window of a charity shop that exclusively sells used gimp costumes, I'm lucky if I even notice it through the thick layers of cum.
 
Mr Pigeon said:
Personally I've grown cynical to movie marketing, so the trailers that used to get me hyped enough to go and watch The Stinky Bum II now just make me think "Oh look, Chris Pratt is a hard man alpha bro who puts his palm up in front of dinosaurs, sooooo coooool not" or "I'd rather piss in my own ear".

And then when the movie is available to stream it ends up on one of a billion different platforms that all cost £7.99 a month each, and have two things worth watching and a hundred things that are just filler shite.

Everyone is desperate to get your monthly subscription now that they're all making "content" just for the sake of having something to put on their sparsely stocked shelves. Blockbusters used to be a big event as well, all of them spaced out carefully so the market wasn't overly saturated. Now they're just slightly fancier products surrounded by a scrolling list of shite. Like seeing a three piece suit in the window of a charity shop that exclusively sells used gimp costumes, I'm lucky if I even notice it through the thick layers of cum.
Click to expand...

Only just skimmed through our post so may have missed a bit of context, but I agree - layers of cum is the main reason why cinemas are failing. You're right.
 
Studios need to take risks and try create new blockbusters. Not rehash the same old shit with superheroes, sequels, remakes etc.

The cinema needs a buzz like it did with The Matrix or Avatar. New IP's that can get people talking and then give those films a proper theatrical run.

And even then, I don't know if it'll be enough. It's just a dying industry (the cinema that is).

It'll soon be reserved for premieres and the odd q&a sessions etc. Chains like Vue are on their last legs.
 
It's almost insulting how bad most of them are and I bet plenty of people are simply sick of them. I know I am. I'm tired. the feeling I get when I finish a good show and decide to catch up with latest blockbusters is very close to depression. just why? all I'm thinking is why are you perfectly fine with such bad acting? why are you perfectly fine with such a basic plot? why is the audience perfectly fine with actors and directors offering them warm piece of poo yet again - and them actually paying for that poo? I don't get it. but I bet plenty of them are tired as well. people have been exposed to so much shit it's getting harder to feel excitement.
 
Literally all of the films are shit plus you can smoke weed at home whilst you watch so why would I go to the cinema?
 
A few years ago I was into watching a movie at the weekend whilst I chilled out. These days it feels like TV series have become what movies were. Some have huge budgets and good actors, and I think people are now more into watching an hour or more from the comfort of their home. Sometimes I'm stuck for something to watch when I've nothing to do and the thought of watching a film crossed my mind, but then I usually decide I can't be bothered watching something for an hour and a half.

I never go to the cinema for this reason. If there was something I really wanted to watch then I'd wait for a stream.

Another thing I've noticed is that cinemas have shut in a lot of towns. UCI went bust a while ago. Makes you wonder how long they'll survive really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.