What will be the biggest flop of 2004? (1 Viewer)

[Les Samuel]

second to last

David that's fine if that's how you feel based on what you were given and read, what about everyone else.

 

[Shawn_KE]

Burton's Batman suit was still faithful to the look of Batman and is something he would wear in the real world.

Catwoman looks like a $15 hooker in that ripped outfit.

I'm always open to peoples impressions of what the costums should look like even if they differ from the comic, but only if they remain faithful to what the character might wear.

Superman is the only costume you can not screw with.

 

[WillG]

Since when did a sucky story keep people out of theaters?

 

[Malcolm R]

Does it matter? Both were huge hits, with the second doing even better than the first.

 

[TheLongshot]

"The Mummy Returns" had the advantage of being a sequel of a very successful film that many discovered on home video (like myself), not to mention more heavily promoted than the original. If "Returns" was the first film, would it have done as well? I don't think so.

Jason

 

[Moe Maishlish]

You know what, it's probably right....

You've gotta factor in the fact that Halle "I've got an OSCAR" Barry's the lead, and is probably commanding a pretty hefty sum... probably about 10% of the budget.

I seem to recall that the X-Men 2 shooting schedule had to be delayed because Barry wanted to renegotiate her contract after winning her Oscar.

Moe.

 

[CoreyII]

Hey Les, while aesthetically the Batsuit looked cool, I've never been crazy about the idea of a Batman running around with rubber muscles molded onto his suit to make him look physically imposing. The fact that the Bat-Man is a physical powerhouse escaped Tim Burton. I won't get into it, but I hate all four of the Bat-Crap films, I've said it before, Tim Burton has done just as much damage to the franchise as Joel Schumacher, but for some reason members on this forum place all their anger on Joel Schumacher. Many people on this forum have somehow fooled themselves into thinking the first Batman film is somekind of comic book classic that is worthy to stand alongside the first Superman, or Spider-Man film.

Having said that, Les I agree with everyone else on this post, Catwoman is going to be a flop. It may and I emphasize on the word "may", it may open big on the first weekend but I guarantee you word of mouth is going to kill this movie let alone the critics. Les, here are in my opinion a few reasons why this movie is going to bomb:

1.) The costume just looks plain awful, there's no two ways about it.

2.) Like David Forbes had mentioned, the synopsis of the plot is as bad as the costume if not worse. I read it also.

3.) The name of the character sounds lame, Patience Price or patience Prince. I know they recently altered the name somewhat, but whatever it is, it definitely doesn't sound as cool as Selina Kyle.

4.) Speaking of Selina Kyle, having read Batman comics for many many years, I've always felt that Catwoman at least after Michelle Pfifer's bastardization is a very overrated character. She works better as a supporting character in the Batman continuity rather than her own movie.

5.) The idea of a Catwoman movie has been floating around for years at Warner Bros. Chances are the lame-ass script for this movie probably has been floating around for years as well. This films was originally supposed to be a spin-off of Batman Returns with Michelle Pffifer reprising the role. I guess too much time went by and Pffifer was probably no longer interested, then Ashley Judd was attached to the project and finally Halle Berry.

6.) If you look at the photo of Halle on the cover of the latest Entertainment Weekly you can tell she's just mugging it up for the camera and is not taking the role all that serious just like she did with the Storm character.

7.) They(Warner Bros.) grabbed some "Johnny Come Lately" director named Pitof to helm this stinker. I read an article in which he talks about the film and it is obvious he has no knowledge of the Catwoman character. Where the hell did Warner Bros. find this clown.

8.) Do you honestly expect a good Catwoman film from the company that can't even produce a good Batman film, the company that gave you such dreck as Steel and Birds of Prey. As much as I like Christian Bale, David Goyer, and Christopher Nolan, I am very skeptical about this latest Bat-film coming out.

As far as films like Dirty Dancing 2 and the Mask 2, these films aren't being advertised as heavily as Catwoman. I've seen Halle in costume in at least 3 different magazines.

 

[CoreyII]

By the way, Sky Captain and the World of Tommorrow may not do that well but I have a gut feeling that this film like the Rocketeer before it will have a cult following for many years to come.

The verdict is still out on Hellboy, especially since it's coming out so close to Van Helsing. Both films deal with heroes fighting supernatural beasts but given the Jackman factor, it's a sure bet Van Helsing is going to outgross Hellboy.

As a matter of fact, Van Helsing will more than likely be the big film to kick off the Summer 2004 movie season. The pace will continue with Shrek 2 and Harry Potter. Then the wall-crawler and the daywalker should have things in check from mid-summer to the end of summer.

If the Punisher and Hellboy are good then they will both be two appetizer's before Van Helsing comes out.

 

[EdHoch]

Van Helsing looks like this years Hulk...huge opening weekend before word get out, then down down down...and I think Hulk was probably a much better film than Van Helsing looks to be...

Biggest bomb on the year, not sure anyone will touch the one already in the books...The Alamo. If it cost as much as they say, this is a huge bomb for Disney, like they haven't got enough problems right now!

 

[WillG]

I think Van Helsing will probably fare well. Jackman has some good appeal and as X-Men has proved, he is pretty good at this sort of thing. Plus Van Helsing will a real person as opposed to the CGI cartoon that was "The Hulk"

 

[ChrisMatson]

I believe that overall VH has more CGI than Hulk--and judging from the trailers and clips, it seems like a mix of mediocre to poor CGI at that.

 

[Matthew Chmiel]

Van Helsing will probably not be this year's Hulk.

Hulk was a popcorn movie that tried too hard to be a serious drama.

Van Helsing looks like a fun popcorn flick.

If people have a good time at Van Helsing, I'm sure the film will have a good word of mouth (ex: The Mummy and The Mummy Returns). If not, then it'll have a huge 2nd weekend decrease (which I expect anyway with Troy opening).

While I don't like Mr. Sommers as a director, he knows how to make an entertaining flick that appeals to the masses, so I'll give him that.

 

[WillG]

It may have more CGI as a whole, but at least the titular character won't be CGI. Personally I can't stand Major CGI characters in a live action film (with the exception of Gollum, which was done extremely well) It's usually so damn obvious, it's distracting. I'll take puppet Yoda over CGI Yoda any time.

 

[clayton b]

Hasn't anybody mentioned Teacher's Pet? What was the budget on it? According to box office mojo it has only made 6.5 million. That's Gigli territory.

Catwoman, Van Helsing and any pretty much every other piece of turd that has been mentioned will probably outgross Teacher's Pet in the first day of release.

I'm sure that Disney was expecting at least 70-100 mil out of teacher's pet.

 

[Scott Weinberg]

Gotta be Catwoman or King Arthur.

 

[Shawn_KE]

Van Helsing will do well. Look how well the horrible Mummy movies did.

Timeline looks to be the biggest clunker.

 

[Paul_Scott]

anybody else think Troy is going to blow?

i hear good buzz on different sites, but its mostly about the action scenes (big deal).
supposedly the chemistry in the love stories is nothing special, and everytime i see Brad Pitt in one of the commercials i have to stiffle a howl- he looks atrociously ill-suited to be in a role that requires the presence and oratory skills to command large numbers of warriors.

i dunno...but this looks like a dog to me.

even moreso than Van Helsing (which i'm not expecting anything great from anyway)

 

[Robert TX]

Budget for Teacher's Pet was 10 mil.

However, The Alamo had a 95 mil budget (according to imdb.com). Not sure if that includes marketing or not. It has only made 19 mil. I'd call that a bomb.

 

[Malcolm R]

Yeah, I'm not sure what gets everyone so high on "Troy." The only thing that has me marginally interested is that it's directed by Wolfgang Peterson. Other than that, it just looks like a more boring rehash of "Gladiator" IMO.

That said, I still don't think it'll be a flop like "The Alamo" or "Catwoman," or perhaps "Garfield." I'm also not sure about "I, Robot." The trailer I saw was ridiculous. I'm rather tepid on "The Terminal" too, despite the Spielberg/Hanks pedigree.

 

[Andy Sheets]

I'm kind of on the fence about it. The script has gotten good reviews, and I'm inclined to trust the talent on the movie, but the marketing doesn't seem to be coming together on it. The message I'm getting from most of the ads is "Orlando Bloom scores a hot chick and Brad Pitt likes to kill people...lots of boats and many people running into each other with shields". And I have to admit that while I think Pitt is generally underrated, I don't understand why he's using that accent in the trailers.