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.