Who gave this the go-ahead?: Movies that seemed destined to flop
The Lone Ranger - Hey, let's make a movie based on a tv show that no one under 60 remembers! And let's spend at least $200 million making and marketing it!
Rush - Of course Americans care about a British race car driver from 40 years ago! We don't even need to find a bankable star to appear in it!
Rush already has earned high grosses internationally OP. Formula racing is very popular everyplace outside the US.
It's a bit of a gamble here, where Nascar reigns supreme. But good word of mouth may carry it.
From what I understand, one of the most interesting things about Hunt was that he was an anti-Apartheid activist who would give some of his winnings to the cause, but Opie didn't think that was interesting enough to make it into the film.
Oh yes, Hillary Swank will stun audiences when they see her as a femme fatale in The Black Dahlia!
The Wizard of Oz. BOMB!
And that Wonder Life film. CRAP!
Actors have no.charisma nowadays. Cut and splice movie making. No character development or real stotytelling. Flops.abound
R6 = Madonna.
"The Lone Ranger" and "Rush" might not be hits, but it's easy to see the motivation behind them.
It wouldn't be the first time that Johnny Depp in weird makeup made an action film with dubious pop culture value into a hit. And American audiences like sports movies and cars going fast, so even the fact that the main character is a Brit doesn't seem like a huge deterrent.
"The Lone Ranger" failed because it looked (and was) terrible, and "Rush," which has been getting decent reviews, probably didn't do as well because it was too mainstream for people who made "Drive" into an art-house hit but not mainstream enough for the "Fast & Furious" crowd.
R3, "Town & Country" was a vastly bigger failure than "Ishtar," so Warren Beatty has the distinction of starring in *two* of the biggest flops in history. "Town & Country" was so bad that he hasn't acted, period, in the 12 years since it came out.
Btw it wasn't quite as noticeable since its budget wasn't as huge, but "R.I.P.D." was almost as big a flop (in terms of net loss) as "The Lone Ranger." That said, I think the best yardstick of measuring flops is production cost (not counting marketing) in relation to worldwide gross. On that level, "The Lone Ranger" didn't do all that badly, since it grossed nearly what it cost to make (though Disney still lost $130 million from promotional expenses). The biggest flop, by a wide margin? "Lolita" - cost $62 million to make, grossed barely $1 million in theaters. #2 is "The Adventures of Pluto Nash" ($100M budget, $7M gross), and #3 is "Gigli" ($90M budget, $9M gross).
OP, the rest of the world loves Formula 1 racing, the drivers are seen as hugely glamorous and exciting. A movie can make a ton of money outside the US, the US market isn't the be-all and end-all for profit.
R2 James Hunt was a real badass, during one race his steering wheel malfunctioned (not like the wheel in a normal car) and the handle bit came off - Hunt stuck the bare metal into the palm of his hand to get a better grip and finished the race steering by an inch of steel stuck in his flesh.
A badass racing driver with movie star looks and a complex personality, I'm just surprised it took so long to make a movie about him. I haven't watched it yet though, I hope to get some time next week to catch up with a few movies.
Who the hell would care about yet another round of the down-it-goes melodrama.
"Oh my God. I'm back. I'm home. All the time, it was... We finally really did it ... You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!"
We are switching to the new platform for The DataLounge this weekend. All of our mobile users have been using it for over a week and all first time users have been using it for about a month - which adds up to well over one million users. So we're ready to end this phase of the testing and move everybody to the new site. (more)
And yes, we've changed the look and some of how it operates.
Yes, we know you just *hate* it in well in advance.
Yes, we know we suck.
Yes, we are the biggest suckers that ever sucked.
But it was time for a change and with the huge shift to mobile it was long overdue. We've taken this opportunity not only to update the look but also make major changes under the hood (or "bonnet" if you're either British or pretentious or both). And we have to prepare for 2016 - a presidential election year where we can normally expect to see a 60% jump in traffic (yes, we've seen 5 presidential elections so far…Christ we're old).
The site has a bunch - nay, plethora - of new features which will make the site more usable: better search, the ability to ignore posters and threads, see link previews, to pick up a thread where you left off, spam and malware filtering and more.
If you want you can go explore and see for yourself, Click here.
And while running the tests we've noticed two interesting reactions to the new system - people are spending more time on the site and more people that come stay around longer and look at more stuff. Both good things. Yay!
Possibly we've not slain all the dragons and there will be issues that come up during the switchover. There's a help button in the lower right hand corner of the page which you can use to send us bug reports.
Please include as much information about the hardware (PC, Mac, Tablet, Phone etc), operating system (Windows, Mac OS, Android, iOS etc) and browser (Chrome, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer etc) that you are using as possible to help us replicate and fix the problem.
Please note that complaints about colors, fonts, icons and the like are not "bugs" - they are design choices that we've made and we expect one or two cases of world-class bitching. But they won't actually cause headaches, scurvy, heart attacks, Restless Leg Syndrome, Morgellon's Disease or the vapors (but have your smelling salts at hand just in case).
Talking to DataLounge servers. Please wait a moment...