Deadline: 2017's Biggest Box Office Bombs

[JamesG.]

What Were The Biggest Bombs at 2017's Box Office? Deadline’s Most Valuable Blockbuster Tournament
by Anthony D'Alessandro
March 29, 2018


King Arthur: Legend of the Sword






Warner Bros has been fixated on the Camelot legend for years, developing several projects that included a remake of John Boorman’s Excalibur. Executives finally sparked to King Arthur: Legend of the Sword, from a well drawn blueprint by writer Joby Harold that spread revelations of the Arthurian mythology over a series of films.

The studio tapped director Guy Ritchie, whose playful, kinetic style translated well to the Sherlock Holmes films, and chose "Sons of Anarchy" star Charlie Hunnam to play the man who drew the sword from the stone.




But moviegoer interest in classic IP titles is no longer reliable. Do young people even read anymore? And waiting for future films to introduce Merlin, Lancelot and Guinevere left the film with a gritty origin story about the formative moments of a great king, without the love story.

Add a production budget of $175M before P&A, and the result was a loss of $153.2M for Warner Bros and Village Roadshow. The studio tried some reshoots after a first screening that elicited alarming scores, but the film ultimately never found its footing.




Critics thumped the result, charging the film with containing hackneyed images that seemed borrowed from better Warner Bros movies (Voldemort’s snake from Harry Potter, the Lord of the Rings elephants, and a knight who looked a lot like Immortan Joe from Mad Max Fury Road).

The biggest disappointment is that Hunnam — who was ridiculously ripped — won’t get to take Arthur to the heights reached in the mythical tale.









Monster Trucks






A live-action/animated hybrid passion project of former Paramount president Adam Goodman, Monster Trucks wasn’t made until long after Goodman was gone.

The film proved the difficulty of launching a four quadrant tent pole without a branded property to back it up. It was clear for a long time this one was going to be a big budget loser when the studio finally released it.




Monster Trucks missed several release dates, starting when it moved off its summer 2015 opening. Before the film even had a chance to play over MLK weekend last year, Viacom had already written off the film to the tune of $115M.

Our financial analysts see that in the end, Monster Trucks was a $123.1M loss.









The Promise






The Terry George-directed drama constructed a love triangle between Christian Bale, Charlotte Le Bon and Oscar Isaac to show the shameful early 20th Century genocide of an estimated 1.5 million Armenians by the Turks.

The losses on this one were cushioned by the fact that the film was a very personal project of Armenian mogul Kirk Kerkorian, who absorbed much of the loss posthumously.




The Turkish government has long denied there was a genocide, and the government reportedly used its influence to halt several previous attempts to mount a proper movie. Even though he owned casinos and MGM, even Kerkorian struggled to get a movie made at his own studio.

After Kerkorian’s death, his dream of a David Lean-style epic was realized by a combination of parties. There was UCLA doctor Eric Esrailian, via the late mogul’s Survival Pictures, along with producers Mike Medavoy and William Horberg.

And George, who wrote and directed the celebrated genocide tale Hotel Rwanda, and wrote In The Name of the Father.




Open Road took U.S. rights and released the film April 24, timed to the start of the Armenian Genocide campaign 102 years ago. Few foreign rights were sold, evidence that the taboo nature of the film worked against it.

Critics weren’t kind, either. The result was a $102.1M loss.









The Great Wall






Long before it was bought by China-based Wanda Group for $3.5B, Legendary eyed The Great Wall as a way to engage the fast growing movie going audience in the Middle Kingdom.

Numerous directors including Ed Zwick came and went, along with several stars. The picture finally came together with heralded Raise the Red Lantern director Zhang Yimou, and Matt Damon and Pedro Pascal as the outsiders who try to help Chinese warrior defend The Great Wall from a series of monsters.




The most expensive film ever to be shot completely in China, with ancillary and theatrical costs reaching $266.9M, the pain was shared. Universal was in for a 20% stake, with myriad Chinese partners China Film Group and Le Vision Pictures shouldering some.

China generated 51% of the pic’s $334.9M B.O., but the movie hit the wall everywhere else, plain and simple. Having an American star as a savior in a fictitious Chinese tale put off some Asian audiences, and the whole monster tale was greeted with indifference by stateside audiences.

In the end, The Great Wall crumbles with a $74.5M loss.









Geostorm






This disaster film marked the feature directorial debut of Independence Day producer and co-writer Dean Devlin, who sources said struggled to balance the VFX with a compelling plot and character development.

It was backed by Skydance chief David Ellison, and Warner Bros left Skydance to steer production. Reshoots to the tune of $15M were ordered, and Jerry Bruckheimer was called in to try and rescue the film.

Beyond all those problems, moviegoers had lost interest in the star-driven disaster film genre. So what seemed like a good idea when it was greenlit in 2014 proved to be a $71.6M loss.

http://deadline.com/2018/03/king-art...es-1202354934/

[AaronJ]

I haven't seen King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (or any of the other films, for that matter) but I believe that I can safely agree with the article that not including Guinevere, Lancelot, or Merlin was a HUGE mistake. I mean, I sort of understand the thinking, in that they probably didn't want to feel like they were just remaking Excalibur or something. Maybe. But what the hell is the point of a King Arthur movie without those characters?! It strips the entire legend bare.

[Zero_Cool]

Geostorm had a budget? I guess you can say hurricane heist will be on next years list.



Mother
Dark Tower
Valerian
Monster trucks
Ghost in the shell
Life
Downsizing
Cure for a wellness

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by Zero_Cool

Geostorm had a budget? I guess you can say hurricane heist will be on next years list.



Mother
Dark Tower
Valerian
Monster trucks
Ghost in the shell
Life
Downsizing
Cure for a wellness

I loved mother! and A Cure For Wellness, and I enjoyed Valerian. The others I haven't seen and probably won't see, except for Ghost in the Shell -- because I'd watch a movie where Scarlett reads a book for two hours, basically. If she's in it then I don't really care what it's about or if it's any good. Though obviously I would hope it would be good. I keep meaning to see that one.

[cinemaphile]

I don't care what anyone thinks, I thought The Great Wall was pretty damn good. Sure, it was clearly a film made with a box office formula in mind - heavily feature China to tap into that box office, with an American actor shoehorned in for domestic box office (which clearly didn't work as they'd hoped), but it was also beautifully filmed with lots of good action.

[The Debts]

Originally Posted by AaronJ

I haven't seen King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (or any of the other films, for that matter) but I believe that I can safely agree with the article that not including Guinevere, Lancelot, or Merlin was a HUGE mistake. I mean, I sort of understand the thinking, in that they probably didn't want to feel like they were just remaking Excalibur or something. Maybe. But what the hell is the point of a King Arthur movie without those characters?! It strips the entire legend bare.

If you think that's bad, just watch the damn movie. It's an over-edited headache with obnoxious anachronistic dialogue and a CG clusterfruitcake of a climax.

[Creed]

Originally Posted by cinemaphile

I don't care what anyone thinks, I thought The Great Wall was pretty damn good. Sure, it was clearly a film made with a box office formula in mind - heavily feature China to tap into that box office, with an American actor shoehorned in for domestic box office (which clearly didn't work as they'd hoped), but it was also beautifully filmed with lots of good action.

I liked it. Dumb fun with gorgeous cinematography and colours.

[CV19]

Actually I quite liked Geostorm, but maybe that was because I was watching the film with low expectations after having read some poor reviews about it. I have yet to see the King Arthur movie.

[Zero_Cool]

The new Mummy movie might be on this list. Not sure how well it did but I kept hearing nothing but bad things.

[Monterey Jack]

Monster Trucks was a guilty pleasure. Reminded me of one of those B-level "let's rescue this mystical creature from nasty adults" Amblin films from the 80's.

[Cremildo]

I still don't understand the logic behind the decision to pour so much money in a movie like The Promise.

[Poya]

N o b o d y
w a n t e d
a n o t h e r
k i n g
a r t h u r
m o v i e

BTW, these were all in caps.

[cinemaphile]

I think if King Arthur wasn't "King Arthur" it wouldve been a pretty fun movie.
Seriously, if you remove the name and therefore the expectations, and it's just a new movie about a new character taking place in the Middle Ages about knights, swords, and sorcery, made with that Guy Ritchie style, it comes across much better.
When I watched it a second time, knowing what I was gonna get and letting go of my expectations of what a King Arthur movie should be, I actually had fun watching it.

[Chaotic]

Originally Posted by Zero_Cool

The new Mummy movie might be on this list. Not sure how well it did but I kept hearing nothing but bad things.

It killed the Dark Universe plans.

[stvn1974]

I just hope Disney can recover from The Last Jedi bombing.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Poya

N o b o d y
w a n t e d
a n o t h e r
k i n g
a r t h u r
m o v i e

BTW, these were all in caps.

Still in for a possible Merlin franchise

[The Debts]

Originally Posted by cinemaphile

I think if King Arthur wasn't "King Arthur" it wouldve been a pretty fun movie.
Seriously, if you remove the name and therefore the expectations, and it's just a new movie about a new character taking place in the Middle Ages about knights, swords, and sorcery, made with that Guy Ritchie style, it comes across much better.
When I watched it a second time, knowing what I was gonna get and letting go of my expectations of what a King Arthur movie should be, I actually had fun watching it.

My dislike of it had nothing to do with it being different from a typical King Arthur story; It had to do with Ritchie's style. I always find him over stylized and incoherent, so it was weird for me to actually enjoy some of his recent work like the Sherlock Holmes films and The Man From UNCLE (the latter of which is probably my favorite work of his so far). Then this monstrosity comes along and snaps me back to my usual distaste of his work.

It also buried Charlie Hunnam's wonderful work in The Lost City of Z the month before, so of course everyone is going to remember the bad movie he was in vs the one that's actually good.