Gods of Egypt is tone deaf CGI bloated slop and I fucking love it. Just a fun movie for me.
I know it’s utter garbage to most, not even fun bad. I’m just a total sucker for fantasy derived from Egyptian gods/lore no matter how cheesy.
$140 million budget and just barely made it back at $150.6 million.
I can’t find it now but I remember finding it pretty funny at the time when Uwe Boll said Leatherheads was a completely unnecessary movie. He’s right, but he also made the Postal movie.
the tv series of skylanders
I’m gonna go in a different direction than everyone else here.
Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse Of The Black Pearl
is a big budget movie that had absolutely no business getting made, because:
-
Pirate movies have always been box office poison. Less than a decade earlier, Cutthroat Island made the Guinness Book of Records as the biggest box office bomb of all time, the latest in a series of pirate-themed failures. The only vaguely pirate-themed movies that had ever had anything you’d call success was Muppet Treasure Island and Goonies, and you could argue that Goonies wasn’t really a pirate movie, it had some pirate theming in it. In 2002, Disney’s Treasure Planet, basically Treasure Island IN SPAAACE had proven a box office flop. Treasure Planet is a well-written, well-made, well-advertised, well-reviewed pirate movie that failed at the box office. What idiot would bankroll another pirate film?
-
It was a movie based on an old ride at Disney World. It was their fourth attempt at this, they made a TV movie based on Tower of Terror in 1997 that they’re apparently not proud of, 2000s Mission To Mars was a “commercial disappointment” and 2002’s The Country Bears was a critical and commercial flop. Yeah the year before they made Pirates of the Caribbean, Disney made a G-rated pastiche of the Blues Brothers out of The Country Bear Jamboree. They decided to do that and nobody stopped them. No movie based on a theme park attraction had ever made its money back.
The public’s reaction to the announcement was “They’re making a movie based on WHAT?” This wasn’t going to work. This movie had no business being made.
The film achieved massive critical and commercial success as the 141st highest grossing movie of all time taking $654.3 million against it’s $140 million budget and spawning four sequels.
Everything you said was why it made so much. No one saw it coming and it was entertaining. I still think the first two are solid. After that it fell off. But the third is decent just because of Jack Sparrow’s father being Keith Richards.
You can bag on all you want but it’s movie. The main objective is to entertain. And it does that on many levels. It’s not necessarily cinema but most of these movies are not considered high class cinema. They are blockbusters whose main objective is to make money while entertaining.
-
Morbius
not sure if it was “big budget” but Madame Web.
It was, essentially, a Spider-Man prequel that simply didn’t need to happen story wise. It introduced a bunch of characters from the comics that do indeed have Spider-Man like powers but in the film they simply “suggest” it. You had a villain whose entire purpose for doing what he did was he had a dream where said “spider people” killed him. You had Uncle Ben shoed in to simply say to the audience 'hey, HEY ASSHOLE! look…It’s a Spider Man Prequel!" and THAT was the ONLY connection to Peter Parker.
It’s like having a Star Wars Prequel where Uncle Owen is in it and he’s hanging out with a bunch of people who could potentially be Padawans but we’re not sure and they’re being hunted cause some random Sith had a dream that sure, they could potentially be Jedi one day. Now none of them actually are but they COULD be one day, just not in this movie.
I know your Star Wars comparison was to reinforce your point, but that does sound like a plausible plot for a legit Star Wars movie that I’d watch.
Loveble Sidekick: The Untold Story of My Rise to Fortune
starring
Lovable Sidekick - as Himself
Scarlett Johansson - as LolaIt had no business being made, so it wasn’t.
Yeah, sure, but the full penetration sex scene was a bit over the top.
Title of your sex tape!
I dunno what counts as big budget, but 30 Minutes or Less was seen as tasteless in how it was based on a real-life serious event that had occurred.
On a false advertising note, the movie’s run time is 1 hour, 23 minutes. Bullshit.
That happened where I grew up, and the details are so fucking bonkers.
I’ve seen the video of that dude getting blown up. Pretty crazy
The Emoji Movie
Yes. You look at the title of the movie and you go, nope.
You just know there’s some producer out there who is salivating over minion merch.
Every Jurassic Park movie after the 2nd one.
A lot of the Movies Sony makes now. Morbius, Kraven, etc.
How dare you slight the cohesion and vision of the Whatever Sony Has The Rights To Cinematic Universe?
I was playing Spider-Man 2, where Kraven is a major character, when this movie came out and I wasn’t even aware of it. It is also now available on Netflix.
i first heard of kraven from the game, spiderman instead of the movie, i think the GAME cutscenes are better than the movie.
I’d like to add Uncharted to that, please.
Those are big budget? I thought they were great low budget movies
Waterworld. At the time the most expensive movie ever made and the most spectacular flop of all time.
You fucking take that back right now…
But I like Waterworld.
I “think” John Carter beat it, but yeah.
John Carter suffered from an awful title.
“Princess of Mars,” would have resonated better with marketing. And is actually one of the book titles.
I agree, but Dianey was desperate to create a new franchise. It was their response to Iron Man and the anticipated success of the MCU.
Neither of those movies were really all that terrible. I enjoyed John Carter. But clearly they didn’t connect with audiences.
Absolutely, I enjoyed both for what they were, silly fantasy/adventure movies.
Yeah, I was upset they didnt continue John Carter, it was just a fun zany scifi movie. I think it was the advertising that killed it, but if they had stuck with it I think it could have done well.
It’s the name and the power concept, all around bland and forgettable. Feel like that movie was a passion project of a book fan.
I must be on my own. I know John Carter flopped phenomenally, but I really liked it. Thought it was a great movie. Was very annoyed when I found out that there may never be a 2nd. Even if there was, at this stage it is very unlikely to be the same cast. IIRC, a lot of the blame was on Disney marketing. But IDK about these things.
It would have been a great Sci Fi miniseries, and eventually a movie. They didn’t prep the groundwork for the franchise and casted very poorly
Don’t worry brother, I still go back and watch waterworld. I like oceanscapes and post apocalyptic settings. Esthetic can be enough for me.
I also liked it. But i think that it was completely miscast.
I did some digging and apparently Waterworld somehow broke even. I remember a lot of the hype around the film at the time was wanting to see if it was really as bad as people said it was.
‘Live action’ remakes of animated classics, or any remake of an already good film.
Remake the ones that had potential. but failed in the execution.
It’s how Disney retains the trademark on the product. Like, Snow White, for instance. If the trademark was coming up, they’d rather crap out a bad movie then let the IP go to public domain.
And the only IP of any note we got out of it is :: checks my notes:: a Winnie the Pooh slasher pic…
There’s a Mickey mouse and at least 2 Popeye ones now, too.
All those Disney live action remakes are sooo bad. People just don’t have the expressiveness of cartoon characters. The Lion King was the worst. The characters were animated and still wooden
I think Christopher Robin and maleficent were good. As long as they’re telling a new story it’s fun to see the old characters. When it’s just the exact same plot but a little darker and live action over animation it’s so dumb. Our CGI just ain’t good enough to justify that.
They’re remaking Moana already, and still a new movie, relative.
Moana is all about the musical performances. I love the whole movie but what is on the screen just kinda punctuates and gives context to the music for me. Frozen is the same way. And they’re thinking they are going to remake all that music and have it be just as good?
It would be like trying to remake The Blues Brothers with Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham just because the original is 40 years old.
The Cinderella one slapped. But that was the first one, and it was successful because it was made with care and thoughtful intention. Disney has been chasing that sucess ever since
You actually wrong about this one. Those movies make bank. Suburban moms ruin everything.
Live action remakes are the end point of capitalism in media. Take something that
people likedmade money, and do it again with the same formula but a fresh coat of paint. No need to hire writers or spend time making a good story, just use the last one. No risks were ever taken.
Battleship. It’s just such a bizarre license for a movie, and certainly one nobody ever asked for. (Well, outside Hasbro execs clearly desperate for another Transformers-level hit.)
Oddly watchable in a big dumb fun kind of way, at least. And hey, it has Jesse Plemons not playing a total sociopath, so that’s neat.
Ikr‽ That like Mike movie really painted him into a corner at an early age. His career still hasn’t escaped the type casting…
I’m still waiting for the film adaptation of Checkers.
Like the Queens Gambit but checkers would be hilarious
All I need to know is, does anyone say, “You sank my battleship!”?
Yes, they work in the line “they’re not gonna sink this battleship!”. When you’re committed to this absurd premise, you pretty much have to say it.
It’s shit but also entertaining. I kinda wanna watch that one again.
I like it. It’s like junk food, you know it’s bad, but it’s still nice when you get the craving for something bad.
Yeah I’m not even sure why I watched it, it looks so bad. But it’s entertaining as heck, and well worth watching again
The Hobbit trilogy. It’s hard to understand how Peter Jackson could mess up movie after movie after movie like that.
Simple:
He and his crew had 2 years of prep for Lotr, storyboards, finding locations, making props and sets, etc.
New Line Cinemas forced him to do that same prep in 6 months for the Hobbit. Allegedly they didn’t even fully finish the script and had to cut in Del Toro scenes.
The forced trilogy structure also really hurt it. When the Hobbit film adaptation was initially announced (at the time just two movies, even), I thought that it didn’t make any sense to adapt a book shorter than any of the individual LotR installments into multiple movies. When they revealed it would be a trilogy, I knew it was some studio decision to milk it for money and didn’t have high hopes.
There is actually a fan edit floating around online somewhere called “The Hobbit: Extended Edition” which, contrary to what the name might imply, cuts down the trilogy into a single movie of comparable length to the LotR Extended films. Still not perfect, but a huge improvement in quality just from cutting out all of the extra garbage that didn’t need to be there.
There are a few different edits, but my fave is the M4 Book Edit. It only follows what was covered in the book and cuts out all the additions like the Kili/Tauriel love story (and Tauriel is cut out completely along with Azog until the end), the Dol Guldur stuff, and Gandalf’s escapades outside the party. It cuts the trilogy down to 4hr18min. Aside from a few unavoidably janky transitions, it’s great.
I absolutely adore it for 2 reasons: One, I really dislike the trilogy as a whole, but that’s because of the bloat, which M4 gets rid of. Two, the older I get the harder it is to go through LOTR as often as I like. I usually do an LOTR rewatch once a year, and tried to add in the Hobbit, but usually stopped after the first. It’s just too much time for not enough payoff. With the M4 edit, I’ll get stoned and watch it 5 or 6 times a year.
For as much flack as Jackson gets the for The Hobbit movies, he did a phenomenal job where it counts. There really is a wonderful, true-to-source Hobbit adventure scattered throughout the 8hr52min bloat that is the trilogy.
For funsies, if you like the other bits there’s another fan edit called Durin’s Folk and the Hill of Sorcery that’s 1hr8min that covers Gandalf’s adventure after he fucks off from the party at Mirkwood.
I think it was Prime’s Theater where I learnt that for the Smaug fight scene for movie 2, they planed the set the night before, painted the next morning, filmed, and the paint was still wet when the sets were taken down.
I like them all ¯_(ツ)_/¯
(Yes I had read the book before they were made)
