Top 10 movie flops of the decade

[GLaDOS]

I totally agree with Battlefield Earth, Pluto Nash, Catwoman and Gigli, but where's Speed Racer? Didn't that flop too?

[jadedeath]

Even Scientology couldn't save Battlefield Earth...

Logan

[Rhettroactive]

Yeah I gotta go with Battlefield Earth.

My friends and I hold a yearly Oscar party, where the biggest loser (one with the most wrong Oscar guesses) must pass off an old DVD copy of Battlefield Earth.

I've actually seen it, and it's in my top three worst films of all time.

[spolcyc]

I would have added Watchmen to the list: Budget $130 mil Gross $107.5 mil Not a major bomb or flop, but with all the hype for the film I thought for sure it would be an easy $200 mil. Now if you add foreign tickets and home video sales then it had a total of $232.2 mil gross.

[Sixx]

Originally Posted by Canada

GI Joe

Ditto!

[Fors*]

I have to go with Land of the Lost myself.....

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by Elvis

I know what a "bomb" or "flop" is.......technically speaking. I just listed three bombs (in my humble opinion) of the past year.

Good, because we're not talking about Bombs, we're talking about Flops--
If you can't do the Math, go start your own Bomb thread elsewhere.

(Well, that was just an expression, we don't really want you to start your own thread... )

Originally Posted by kotsedriver

I totally agree with Battlefield Earth, Pluto Nash, Catwoman and Gigli, but where's Speed Racer? Didn't that flop too?

Good question: Quality aside (and I happened to like it, in no small part because unlike most of its audience, I'd seen the original and knew what was going on), it made $43M domestic on a $120M budget, which puts it slightly between Catwoman and Gigli--
And only because it'd been squash-sandwiched between #'s 2 & 3 of the most successful films that year within a week of each other, with odd trailers and confused reviews, but got more "Huh?" from the audience to take the "blame" as compared to Prince Caspian's similar sabotaging.
(Maybe it did better overseas, to cushion the final-numbers blow, but it's other countries so who cares?)

Seems to be more of a backlash to defend it, now that people have actually gotten a look at the darn thing--
Either the article wanted to focus on financial, troubled-production and critical flops that deserved it, or just plain forgot, since the movie didn't seem as "bad" nowadays.

[jadedeath]

Originally Posted by EricJ

(Maybe it did better overseas, to cushion the final-numbers blow, but it's other countries so who cares?)

Wow.

It only took one sentence to completely destroy all credibility.

Considering that {in most cases} upwards of HALF the revenue generated on a movie comes from overseas markets, that's a pretty asinine claim, especially since we're talking about Hollywood, which is out to make money and it doesn't give a witches tit where it comes from.

Logan

[Beast]

Originally Posted by Elvis

Yeah we do its called what we think is hollywood trash...who cares what the budget / box office receipts are.
For me the biggest flops this year are: Star Trek 2009, Transformers 2 and G.I. Joe. Clearly flops in my book

Thanks for clearly pointing out you don't understand what Flop means.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by opterasis

Oh man, I always love cinema elitists that feel the need to inform the world of what their favorite movies are by putting it in their sig so everyone knows they have such awesome taste in movies, and then storm around threads declaring what movies are trash, yet don't even know what the word "flop" means.

"The phrase box office bomb (also referred to as a flop) refers to a film for which the production and marketing costs greatly exceeded the revenue retained by the movie studio."

Get used to it, Elvis will beat his nerd rage over these films into your head.

Regardless of the fact that it has no bearing on the current conversation.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by spolcyc

I would have added Watchmen to the list: Budget $130 mil Gross $107.5 mil Not a major bomb or flop, but with all the hype for the film I thought for sure it would be an easy $200 mil. Now if you add foreign tickets and home video sales then it had a total of $232.2 mil gross.

Plus don't forget they had to split part of the box office with Fox.

So yeah, it probably should have gotten a mention on the list.

[Pondosinatra]

Originally Posted by Blu Titan

Transformers 2's cost is $200 million and it grossed $833 million worldwide. Throw in another $150 million in DVD/b-ray sales and you got almost $1 billion.

Obviously you can't put a price tag on stupidity....

[GLaDOS]

Originally Posted by Elvis

Yeah we do its called what we think is hollywood trash...who cares what the budget / box office receipts are.
For me the biggest flops this year are: Star Trek 2009, Transformers 2 and G.I. Joe. Clearly flops in my book

*Facepalm*

Star Trek received universal acclaim from critics (95% on RT), and its domestic gross was $257 million over its $140 million budget, so that's not what I'd call a flop in my book.

Transformers 2 may have gotten panned by critics, but its domestic gross was $317 million over its $200 million budget, so that's not a flop.

G.I. Joe was surprisingly a flop, as stated; it grossed $150 million domestically, under its $170 million budget, despite grossing $300 worldwide.

So, as seeing from how our movies have grossed in this year, a "flop" is any movie that exceeds under its budget. Star Trek and Transformers 2 weren't flops as you stated, but G.I. Joe was.

[uziel5000]

Originally Posted by Elvis

I know what a "bomb" or "flop" is.......technically speaking. I just listed three bombs (in my humble opinion) of the past year.

Sorry but neither of those films are flops. You might think they are bad films and that's OK but they are NOT flops. They all made a lot of money, whether youthink they sucked or not.

A flop is a movie that loses money at the box office. Both good films and bad ones have suffered that fate.

[Warlordu]

Transformers 2

[icyteddy]

Originally Posted by kotsedriver

*Facepalm*

G.I. Joe was surprisingly a flop, as stated; it grossed $150 million domestically, under its $170 million budget, despite grossing $300 worldwide.

So, as seeing from how our movies have grossed in this year, a "flop" is any movie that exceeds under its budget. Star Trek and Transformers 2 weren't flops as you stated, but G.I. Joe was.

I tend to disagree that G.I. Joe was flop. Even though it was not a blockbuster success the studios was hoping for, but it's gross was solid. A $175 budget and it gross $300 worldwide is NOT a flop by any means. Count in some home video sales and it still made money. The studio would not plan on making a sequel if they consider the franchise to be a flop. By my understanding the sequel is already underway.

[Another_Dude]

Originally Posted by Elvis

Yeah we do its called what we think is hollywood trash...who cares what the budget / box office receipts are.
For me the biggest flops this year are: Star Trek 2009, Transformers 2 and G.I. Joe. Clearly flops in my book

This isn't getting old at all...

[Beast]

Originally Posted by Another_Dude

This isn't getting old at all...

In fact, it ages like fine whine.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by jadedeath

Wow.

It only took one sentence to completely destroy all credibility.

Considering that {in most cases} upwards of HALF the revenue generated on a movie comes from overseas markets, that's a pretty asinine claim, especially since we're talking about Hollywood, which is out to make money and it doesn't give a witches tit where it comes from.

Don't mean to be xenophobic, but...evidently NOT.
At the risk of sounding ethnicist, there are some countries that will watch anything that looks American, regardless of whether they've been properly warned by discerning native experts or not, in the interest of international understanding...
If I said that TF2 made more money overseas, would that emphasize the point?

(Just sidetracking to point out that one look at how American films are promoted in Asian and some European countries, and "Yeah, but look how much it made WORLDWIDE!" just starts to sound that much more underwhelming as an artistic defense.)

[casablanca3]

Originally Posted by icyteddy

I tend to disagree that G.I. Joe was flop. Even though it was not a blockbuster success the studios was hoping for, but it's gross was solid. A $175 budget and it gross $300 worldwide is NOT a flop by any means. Count in some home video sales and it still made money. The studio would not plan on making a sequel if they consider the franchise to be a flop. By my understanding the sequel is already underway.

Don't forget to factor in toy sales! That is where the real money comes from!