175 replies to this topic

[Jim Ohara]

I'm going to see it tonight because the reviews I'm reading here make it sound like it's quite good. Ultimately I think it needed a star actor. This should have been the next Pirates of the Caribbean, but it looks to be anything but. Really you can't be spending $200mil+ on a movie without a star actor or a character that's been in dozens of shows/movies/household books already. Trouble is I don't know of any stars big enough to carry this movie anymore. But I'd bet a Matt Damon or Chris Pine led movie would have had more success.

One thing not mentioned - it's 85 degrees in March here. This is unheard off. Who the hell wants to go to the movies when Spring got here 4 weeks early?

[garjones]

One thing not mentioned - it's 85 degrees in March here. This is unheard off. Who the hell wants to go to the movies when Spring got here 4 weeks early?

My pal Alex who's managed cinemas for 30 years would tell you not very many. He used to check the weather forecast and one like that would have him sending half the staff home early. Maybe slightly accentuated by running cinemas in South Wales and Cornwall near the beach but good weather does not make for good box office, especially when unexpected. At least in colder climes like northern America and Europe where a big chunk of box office comes.

Now someone will ask why they release blockbusters in the Summer, that's because people (especially kids) have time off and can fill matinee shows. Even then it may be just following a tradition as the two highest grossing films of all time came out in December.

Probably not the primary reason for John Carter's failure but it can't have helped.

[Ogul]

That's naked, not half-naked. Half-naked would actually be worse than fully clothed, because it's not only not true to the source material, it's actually insulting to the source material. The nakedness had a cultural reason in the books, semi-nakedness has none. It would be a cinematic choice designed only to tittilate, nothing more.

See, now that would have gotten asses in the theaters. Or at least on the screen.

[garjones]

It could have been the sci-fi Caligula (except Disney's marketing were not allowed to say it was sci-fi of course).

[brucegray666]

"John Cater: Warlord of Uranus."

... Ouch.

That will be the XXX version.

I'd be more likely to see this than the real version.

[steveuk]

It could have been the sci-fi Caligula (except Disney's marketing were not allowed to say it was sci-fi of course).

A scifi Caligula you say...?

[Patrick A]

Saw this over the weekend.

It was good, but nothing special.

[steveuk]

John Carter's Trip to Mars Finally Earns Its Budget

Money is awesome because it buys you happiness, if happiness means paying your rent and your insurance bill. Hollywood loves money too. In fact, Hollywood loves money more Smeagol loves his Precious. Which is why the producers of John Carter are probably ecstatic to hear that their film, released one month ago, has finally earned its keep.

BoxOffice Mojo reports that John Carter has grossed $254.5 million, a $4.5 million over its budget—currently not technically a profit, considering its advertising budget, but it’s far better than the epic loss that many had feared.

Unsurprisingly, most of this coin has come from overseas. While John Carter earned over $66 million here in the United States, international markets have pulled in over $188 million. Film Buff Online writes that John Carter was #1 in box office receipts for two weeks in a row in China. This profit will keep increasing, as John Carter has yet to be released in Japan, where it will surely put the movie several million dollars in the black.

Then there are DVD/Blu-Ray sales. Film Buff Online said,

If we need any more proof of the true popularity of the film, we have to look no farther than Amazon.com. Amazon shoppers who signed up for e-mails to alert them of DVD & Blu-Ray new releases were informed that they were able to pre-order John Carter on video today. As of this writing, the Blu-Ray 3-D/Blu-Ray/DVD/Digital Copy was the #1 selling item in Amazon’s Science-Fiction Movie list, and ranked #2 in the Action & Adventure and Fantasy Categories…. It ranks #13 over all in the Movies & TV Blu-Ray list.

If you recall, Waterworld had cost $175 million to make yet only earned $88 million in North America. But according to Yahoo Voices, “Overseas sales along with VHS and DVD sales allowed the movie to recoup” its losses. Ultimately, Waterworld earned $264 million.

If DVD/Blu-Ray sales are strong, it could very well catapult John Carter into the kind of success that give Hollywood executives sweaty dreams and encourage them to marry trophy wives.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/carolpinchefsky/2012/04/02/john-carters-trip-to-mars-is-finally-profitable/

Of course this isn't the whole story. 'JCoM' has to do a lot more business before its really in profit but...

I will be interested to see how Disney handles any news like this? On the one hand they want the public perception of success, but on the other they (like all studios) will try to talk down how much a film makes when communicating with any profit participants.

No profit, no participation.

[garjones]

Yes I think the author is somewhat naive on the concept of box office gross, release in Japan won't get it into the black at all, but it isn't quite the disaster foreseen from the initial US numbers. Could make it back with the DVD. Word of mouth isn't bad, there have been some stinkers of reviews but a lot of people seem to ike it.

[Henry Blanco]

INteresting that the movie is so popular in China. Red China likes the Red Planet?

[garjones]

INteresting that the movie is so popular in China. Red China likes the Red Planet?

One thing with China is they have a quota on foreign made films, they only allow 20 a year (which is increasing to 34 this year). So for big blockbusters with $100m + budgets and top special effects they basically run unopposed (as only Hollywood makes those). Bearing in mind that there are more people that declare they can speak English in China than in the USA that makes it hard for your film to bomb.

The studios also only get 13% of the box office there (rising to 25% this year) which is why this guy looking at the gross is very optimistic when reporting 'this profit will keep increasing".

[Christian U]

I will be interested to see how Disney handles any news like this? On the one hand they want the public perception of success, but on the other they (like all studios) will try to talk down how much a film makes when communicating with any profit participants.

No profit, no participation.

Either way, it hopefully means that JCoM isn't the premature death of big sci-fi epics for a while.

[jamon g]

apparently there's a really big rip off of the return of the jedi speeder scene.

[Nicholas Taggart]

A better villain would have helped this movie a lot. Probably not at the box office, but the quality of it.

I think I would have been more interested in seeing it if Mars itself looked more interesting. When i was reading the books I never imagined Mars as just looking like a desert. I always pictured it looking more fantastic than that.



That article about John Carter's performance in China mentions Waterworld. I find it interesting that it is still used as the archetypal big budget bomb of all bombs when these days there are multiple big budget films that do way worse every year.

[garjones]

That article about John Carter's performance in China mentions Waterworld. I find it interesting that it is still used as the archetypal big budget bomb of all bombs when these days there are multiple big budget films that do way worse every year.

That's a fair point. Green Lantern did worse, if you factor in 16 years of inflation on ticket prices and the 3D premium it did a lot worse.

[Johnny Henning]

If you factor in the money spent developing the aborted Tim Burton/Nic Cage Superman Lives movie, then the Superman franchise is still in the red even though Superman Returns eventually made back its budget and a little more.