Bomb Report

The Movie Guide to Every Flop, Bomb & Disaster since 1997

Home » Yearly Breakdowns » 2018

2018

2018 Box Office Flops

Remaining Movies to be added: White Boy Rick | The Mercy | The Hate U Give
A Wrinkle In Time
Budget: $103 million
Financed by: Disney
Domestic Box Office: $100,478,608
Overseas Box Office: $32,936,626
Read Full Article
Action Point
Budget: $19 million
Financed by: Paramount
Domestic Box Office: $5,059,608
Overseas Box Office: $44,055
Read Full Article
Adrift
Budget: $35 million
Financed by: STX Entertainment; Lakeshore; Huayi Brothers; Ingenious
Domestic Box Office: $31,445,012
Overseas Box Office: $26,481,136
Read Full Article
Bad Times at the El Royale
Budget: $32 million
Financed by: FOX; TSG Entertainment
Domestic Box Office: $17,839,115
Overseas Box Office: $14,043,609
Read Full Article



Death Wish
Budget: $30 million
Financed by: MGM
Domestic Box Office: $34,017,028
Overseas Box Office: $14,559,351
Read Full Article
Early Man
Budget: $50 million
Financed by: StudioCanal; British Film Institute
Domestic Box Office: $8,267,544
Overseas Box Office: $46,355,270
Read Full Article
First Man
Budget: $59 million
Financed by: Universal; DreamWorks; Perfect World Pictures
Domestic Box Office: $44,936,545
Overseas Box Office: $59,075,443
Read Full Article
Holmes & Watson
Budget: $42 million
Financed by: Sony; Mimran Schur
Domestic Box Office: $30,573,626
Overseas Box Office: $11,357,862
Read Full Article
Hunter Killer
Budget: $40 million
Financed by: Millennium Films; Hishow Entertainment
Domestic Box Office: $15,767,460
Overseas Box Office: $13,616,425
Read Full Article
Kin
Budget: $30 million
Financed by: Lionsgate; No Trace Camping
Domestic Box Office: $5,718,096
Overseas Box Office: $4,305,057
Read Full Article
Mortal Engines
Budget: $110 million
Financed by: Media Rights Capital; Universal; Legendary; Perfect World
Domestic Box Office: $15,951,040
Overseas Box Office: $67,663,924
Read Full Article
Overlord
Budget: $38 million
Financed by: Paramount
Domestic Box Office: $21,704,844
Overseas Box Office: Still in release
Read Full Article
Papillon
Budget: N/A
Financed by: Red Granite Pictures
Domestic Box Office: $2,335,896
Overseas Box Office: Still in release
Read Full Article
Robin Hood
Budget: $100 million
Financed by: Lionsgate
Domestic Box Office: $30,824,628
Overseas Box Office: $53,955,918
Read Full Article
Sgt. Stubby: An American Hero
Budget: $22 million
Financed by: Fun Academy
Domestic Box Office: $4,015,935
Overseas Box Office: $485,130
Read Full Article
Sherlock Gnomes
Budget: $59 million
Financed by: Paramount; MGM
Domestic Box Office: $43,242,871
Overseas Box Office: $47,103,000
Read Full Article
Show Dogs
Budget: $44.3 million
Financed by: Riverstone; Global Road
Domestic Box Office: $17,857,020
Overseas Box Office: $21,299,834
Read Full Article
Solo: A Star Wars Story
Budget: N/A
Financed by: Disney
Domestic Box Office: $213,767,512
Overseas Box Office: $179,095,231
Read Full Article
Suspiria
Budget: $20 million
Financed by: Amazon; K Period Media
Domestic Box Office: $2,483,472
Overseas Box Office: Still in release
Read Full Article
The Darkest Minds
Budget: $34 million
Financed by: FOX
Domestic Box Office: $12,695,691
Overseas Box Office: $28,422,127
Read Full Article
The Girl in the Spider’s Web
Budget: $43 million
Financed by: Sony; MGM; New Regency
Domestic Box Office: $14,841,338
Overseas Box Office: $20,323,582
Read Full Article
The Happytime Murders
Budget: $40 million
Financed by: STX; Huayi Brothers Media; Black Bear Pictures
Domestic Box Office: $20,706,452
Overseas Box Office: $6,800,000
Read Full Article
The Hurricane Heist
Budget: $35 million
Financed by: Foresight Unlimited; Sky Cinema
Domestic Box Office: $6,115,825
Overseas Box Office: $24,888,359
Read Full Article
The Nutcracker and the Four Realms
Budget: $128.4 million
Financed by: Disney
Domestic Box Office: $54,858,851
Overseas Box Office: $119,102,218
Read Full Article
The Predator
Budget: $88 million
Financed by: FOX; TSG Entertainment
Domestic Box Office: $51,024,708
Overseas Box Office: $109,517,426
Read Full Article
The Sisters Brothers
Budget: $38 million
Financed by: Why Not Productions; Annapurna; Mobra Films; Atresmedia Cine
Domestic Box Office: $3,143,056
Overseas Box Office: Still in release
Read Full Article
The Spy Who Dumped Me
Budget: $40 million
Financed by: Lionsgate
Domestic Box Office: $33,562,069
Overseas Box Office: $41,758,611
Read Full Article
Vice
Budget: $60 million
Financed by: Annapurna
Domestic Box Office: $47,836,282
Overseas Box Office: $27,691,348
Read Full Article
Welcome to Marwen
Budget: $40 million
Financed by: Universal; DreamWorks; Perfect World Pictures
Domestic Box Office: $10,763,520
Overseas Box Office: $2,145,345
Read Full Article

Leave a Reply

624 Comments

  2. When are you going to add the movies in?? Sorry it’s a pet peeve of mine when you don’t 😂

    Reply

  3. I think you’ve found the one staunch defender of Vice on the internet. Also have noticed that people get really touchy whenever anything negative about Megan Ellison is mentioned across the internet.

    Reply

    • so what ? vice is nominated for 8 oscars….we still remember the insider from 1999..who remembers a cheap commercial movie that made a studio profit from that year ? movies are about legacy moron…romantic comedies make money…who even fucking talks about them after 1 week ? they are toilet papers..you wipe your ass for 1 week and then never talk about it.

      Reply

      • I was talking about the films from a financial standpoint, a.k.a. the reason why this website exists. Newsflash: Every studio’s in it for the money. If it gets award attention, it’s a nice little bonus.
        I didn’t bring up the quality of the films at all. In fact, I very much enjoyed Beale Street, and was disappointed when it didn’t get more attention than it did. Also, The Insider is a quality movie that also has a page on this website: https://bombreport.com/yearly-breakdowns/1999-2/the-insider/
        The Oscars really aren’t an objective indicator of quality as much as they are representative of who can schmooze the best. When The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeosie was nominated for Best Foreign Film, Luis Bunuel outright said he knew he was going to win due to him paying a $10,000 fee to The Academy.
        Your dismissal of romantic comedies suggests either a biased, unhealthy view of the genre or of romance as a whole. Are there bad rom coms? Yes, just like any other genre. Have sex.

        Reply

  7. Will Vox Lux be added? Polarizing film that just fizzled at the box office instead of being the firecracker Neon hoped it would be.

    Reply

  8. The Front Runner must have cost at least $ 20 million and grossed $ 2.9 million at the box office, playing in 807 theaters and starring an A-lister.

    Reply

      • Thanks Rollins. Been looking into The Front Runner, but have yet to find much, if any financial info about it. Reitman does usually make his films for cheap, so perhaps it was done in the mid teens. But if I come across any tax rebate info from the state of Georgia in the near future, I’ll update.

        Reply

      • Jeez. If more people cared as much about Vice as this Jay fellow does, maybe it wouldn’t have bombed so hard at the box office.

        Reply

    • Exactly! First Man is a certified flop as every trade publication has mentioned it as such. They have even composed articles explaining how badly it flopped and why. However, you won’t get an answer. Every time someone brings up First Man being a flop, and inquiring why it is absent, it goes ignored, Essentially the website owner is sacrificing its credibility for favoritism and hope of studio favors. And, honestly, it is not the only one missing from the list that an obvious choice. Others are on, which aren’t flops, so I am viewing this more as the website owner’s personal taste and opinion blog, rather than the standard.

      Reply

      • Let me clarify a few things here. I am not upset or anything with your comment and it is my fault I did not reply earlier. I am currently working alone on the site and fell ill around the holidays and it has lasted through most of this winter so far. There are dozens of titles I fell behind on and have been trying to catch up with. First Man will be added. It tanked and from a personal standpoint I thought it was a piece of shit movie. As for studio favors, I doubt any studio gives the slightest shit about Bomb Report to hand over kickbacks and bribes. I’m not Harry Knowles, I’m just a grumpy asshole from Brooklyn. Give the site (and me) some time to catch up with the movies that haven’t been written up. And any movie that isn’t on the site yet is just an oversight, it’s not my love of a film that I’m trying to shield from failure. Basic arithmetic dictates what movies are added. Some of my favorites are all flops. I hope this does not come across rude and I genuinely appreciate you and everyone that opts to spend time on here. I will try to do better responding to comments and requests.

        Reply

      • “First Man” flopped because not only of The American Flag Controversy, but also because people were more focused on “Venom” and “A Star Is Born” to even care that it was out. It might have took almost all of the former film’s IMAX screens, but that wasn’t enough to save the film.

        Reply

  10. The hate u give and Vice has its last market in april. Welcome to Marwen and White boy Rick in march. First man had its last market in February 8. It was Japan. ???

    Reply

  11. You know, Mary Poppins Returns wasn’t a remake at all, but a sequel that was successful than that bloody remake to Winnie the pooh.

    Reply

    • As for 2018, what will be remembered as the biggest bomb? For me it’s A Wrinkle In Time. It’s based on a well-known book, production costs would’ve been under control thanks to CGI & a cast of mostly lesser known young people, Oprah Winfrey marketed it and it also stars Chris Pine. How could this not have been a success?

      Reply

    • It’s doing very well at the box office so far. It has already made 300 million dollars(with almost 150 million dollars coming from the USA) worldwide on a 90 million dollar budget, and it’s still a LONG way to go before it’s theatrical run ends. I do think it deserved to do make more though. Especially with the FANTASTIC reviews it got from critics and audiences. I do think it has a chance at hitting the 400 million dollar mark before it’s theatrical run ends. Yes, it is the lowest grossing “Spider-Man” film, but it certainly made money.

      I am SAD that many families opted for “The Grinch” instead of this and “Ralph Breaks The Internet”, though. Two quality animated films playing during the Christmas season, but one BAD animated film made by the BIGGEST COMPANY(Illumination) that makes films ONLY for the money.

      This film was EASILY the best film of 2018, both in animation and general. I thought I would NEVER see an animated film of THIS QUALITY after “Zootopia”, but hey! Stranger things have happened(no pun intended)! They did it! It’s OBVIOUS that Sony Pictures Animation put MORE HEART and PASSION into this than “The Emoji Movie”. It shows WHAT A BIG JUMP IN QUALITY a company can have. I hope Sony Pictures Animation continues to make more films of this level of quality. They are a talented studio, and they are REALLY trying hard. Even if they made “The Emoji Movie”.

      Reply

      • Spiderverse is extremely overhyped. Best animated films this year were Isle of Dogs and Incredibles 2. Stop motion gets no love anymore.

        Reply

        • That’s fine. Opinions are opinions. I loved “Incredibles 2” as well, and I do want to watch “Isle of Dogs” sometime in the future. But I will agree, stop motion films DESERVE to do better at the box office.

    • I would love to see “Welcome to Marwen” on this list by now. It’s domestic run has already ended for a month now(10 million dollars), and I think it’s international run has ended too, since it looks like there isn’t any new countries for the film to open(did I mention that it only made 1 MILLION DOLLARS overseas?). Both this film and “Mortal Engines” ended Universal’s solid 2018 on a terrible note. Especially considering that Universal had a good number of box office hits that year(“Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom”, “The Grinch”, and “Halloween”(2018)), that’s really sad.

      Reply

  21. I’ll predict that the First Big Bust of 2019 will be The Upside. The reason I pick this is because it’s a Memorial Tribute to the Weinsteins, which supposed to released it when it hits the fan!!!

    Reply

  23. Widows is done. Most of the international markets have played out, and the lack of awards buzz means no more traction for it. Can’t say I’m surprised after watching it though.

    Reply

  24. I’ll probably watch it once it comes out on DVD, but if I have the time to waste, maybe an outing to the movies for that might be a good idea. “So bad, Netflix doesn’t want it!” should have been on the poster. Great incentive to see it.

    Reply

  25. Put Vice and Mary Queen of Scots on the pending list. It looks like they are just two more awards hopefuls that couldn’t quite break out. Plus, they have $60 million and $25 million budgets respectively and haven’t even come close to breaking even yet.

    Reply

    • No wonder Larry Ellison is taking a firmer hand in Annapurna, Megan Ellison can’t control budgets.

      Reply

    • Too soon to put “Vice” and “Mary Queen of Scots” here. There are still markets that haven’t released both films yet

      Also, Vice just got released like a week ago, it’s too soon to call it a flop

      Reply

      • Vice just has too big of a budget. Probably not all that interesting to international audiences, and it’ll probably cap out around $50 million or less in the states.

        Reply

  28. Hopefully Hollywood gets the message that moviegoers are tired of the unoriginal retreads they keep spitting out. Not one original idea at all.

    Reply

    • Ha ha, Hollywood actually learning from their mistakes, that’s a good one.

      I literally just saw a commercial for yet another King Arthur movie coming out in January.

      Reply

  30. I wonder if Bumblebee, Ralph breaks the Internet and Mary Poppins bombed at box office due to release date in contact and many ppl watching Aquaman

    Despite Aquaman and Bumblebee have same release, but Bumblebee will be bombed if their box office did not reach 350 million USD.

    Is those movies (Bumblebee, Ralph Breaks The Internet, Mary Poppins Returns) wanna to be bombed?

    Reply

  31. I stand corrected…between the $42M budget. a horrible D+ score on Cinemascore, which may seal its box office doom, and the critical pounding (add a possible Razzie nod or two), “Holmes & Watson” deserves to be on this list! How about it, Bomb Report?

    Reply

      • I have not seen Holmes & Watson now do I plan to despite being a fan of Ferrell & Reilly. The trailers look awful & it’s getting terrible reviews.

        Reply

      • I’ll probably watch it once it comes out on DVD, but if I have the time to waste, maybe an outing to the movies for that might be a good idea. “So bad, Netflix doesn’t want it!” should have been on the poster. Great incentive to see it.

        Reply

  33. Oh yes,a BIG bomb, at least critically (4% so far on RT)…There were warning signs: an atrocious trailer and no screening for critics (it’s one thing to hide a cheapo horror flick, but “H&W” is from a major studio, Sony)…Will Ferrell’s star has fallen hard and fast and this turkey won’t help! It should be on this list but it was relatively inexpensive to make…

    Reply

  40. Ralph breaks the internet is a bomb, but no where on the internet is it mentioned…
    Production costs 175M, Promotion 100M.
    Has to make 550M WW but got stuck on 309M at the moment.

    Reply

    • It still has a decent amount of overseas markets left. I do think it’s unlikely it’s going to hit the 550 million dollar mark, but I do think the 400 million dollar mark is still likely. Maybe 500 million dollars if it’s lucky. I hate that a lot of families opted for “The Grinch” rather than “Ralph Breaks The Internet” though. It makes me lose even more faith for Illumination. But hey, “Frozen 2″(also known as Disney Animation’s first cash-grab film in a long time) is going to make a billion dollars next year!

      Reply

  41. Everything opens low during the holiday season. Jumanji opened to $36 million and made over $400 million. It’ll take time, but they’ll be fine.

    Reply

  42. do you think Bumblebee or Mary Poppins Returns could end up here? they are both big budgeted films Bumblebee (135 million) Mary Poppins (130 million) and they both had low openings Bumblebee (21 million) Mary Poppins (22 million). i think they may need good word of mouth to break even.

    Reply

    • Everything opens low during the holiday season. Jumanji opened to $36 million and made over $400 million. It’ll take time, but they’ll be fine.

      Reply

        • Greatest Showman made $150 million with mediocre reviews and a worse opening than either. They’re both making at least $100 million.

    • The release schedule next month is very weak so both will hold firmly.
      Bumblebee will end up around 400M WW (120 US, 150 China & 130 Rest ) so with a little profit.
      Same goes for Poppins ( 160 US, 0 China & 240 Rest )

      Reply

  43. Pacific Rim Uprising and Fantastic Beasts the Crimes of Grindelwald have to be on this list as well. Both did not make back the money on the budgets in the US box office and greatly under performed. If Solo is on the list those two movies should definitely be on the list as well. Bumblebee and Welcome to Marwen are looking iffy too as we end this year. But please update the list with the other two movies I mentioned.

    You can’t put Solo on the list and not put Pacific Rim and Fantastic Beasts 2 as well. Both barely stayed in the top 10 after their releases and were huge disappointments financially.

    Reply

      • That’s decent numbers, but far from great. Warner Bros. really needs to rethink their plans with the “Fantastic Beasts” films. I’m surprised that Warner Bros. is still going through with the five film plan despite the second film kind of underperforming. I really hope that the third film ends up being a stand alone film and NOT the continuation the end of the second film promised. But hey! Warner Bros. is focusing more on “Aquaman” right now! It’s going to hit the 500 million dollar mark at any point this week!

        Reply

  44. How could not Pacific Rim Uprising and Fantastic Beasts 2 : The Crimes of Grinderwald did not bombed? Although they only dominant in ONE WEEK, then fall down due to new movies? It should be added to the list. Both are completely bombed. I give that rate 1/10

    Reply

  46. Widows probably deserves an entry now. Never caught on fire despite the trailers being good (and better than the movie itself).

    Reply

    • Zemeckis occasionally makes good films, and Mortal Engines was better than that Spider man movie that came out this weekend. Spiderverse may be the most overrated movie I’ve seen in years.

      Reply

      • Mortal Engines may have been more ambitious than Spider-Verse but it was boring as sin. Spider-Verse is one of my favorite movies of the year but to each their own.

        Reply

        • What about Spiderverse was good to you in particular? I personally felt it had an underdeveloped story that was fairly derivative in most aspects.

        • I enjoyed quite a bit about Into the Spider-Verse. I thought the animation style was very unique and felt like I was watching a comic book come to life. I enjoyed each version of Spider-Man and appreciated that each one got their own back story explained as well as Kingpin’s, which was pretty tragic but you are still aware that he is a villain (much like Killmonger from Black Panther in that way). It was nice to see an older Peter Parker with flaws, some gritty moments for a PG animated movie, and I found the movie consistently funny and the second end-credits scene had me laughing so hard I was crying. The Stan Lee cameo was a tug at the heart strings as well. I had some issues like the underdevelopment of the uncle and I don’t think Sp//dr got enough screen time. Other than that, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. And hey, it was a whole lot better than Venom.

  51. Mortal Engines? More like Mortal Lock to show up on this website. Who read that book and honestly thought “I could light $100MM on fire, or I could make this into a movie!”

    Reply

  52. Mortal engines is dead. Greatly enjoyed (more than I thought I would), but it is going to be a goner.

    Reply

    • It’s really a shame I thought it would be New franchise but I guess apparently not and it would have been better if Peter Jackson directed it. But now it’s just another lame YA adaptation down the drain

      Reply

    • I think “Mortal Engines” will be on the pending list at any point. It is tracking for an 8-9 million dollar opening weekend in the USA, which is absolutely ABYSMAL results for a big budget film like it.

      Reply

    • Because the film isn’t really tailored to Asia. Its main asset is it being one of the few films in recent Hollywood history to have a majority Asian cast, which is meaningless in countries where plenty of local films have all-Asian casts. Also, China’s recent crackdown on the wealthy doesn’t help either.

      Reply

    • I think the world would end if anyone dared say ANYTHING negative about that crappy movie and way overrated book. I was thrilled to see it barely earn back its budget!

      Reply

  57. What? No mention of Operation Finale? It’s amazing the movie didn’t do better. The story of nazis killing jews is definitely a topic that needs to be portrayed in a movie….every 3 months….

    Reply

  59. Look like Andy Serkis’ Mowgli: Legend of the Jungle will be a big loser in the Big Screen, since it’s so much overshadowed the Jon Faverau version!!!

    Reply

    • It was released on Netflix, and the limited theatrical release was there just to support the film’s Netflix. There was NO information on the budget(from what I found), but I’m guessing it cost at least 150 million dollars to make. Regardless, thanks to the film’s Netflix release, it’s not going to lose money for Warner Bros.

      Reply

  61. Mojo says it went wide from 22 theaters Nov 20 to 807 theaters on Nov 21. In its first weekend November 23-25 it only earned $630,000; just over half of its total gross revenue so far. The only question isn’t whether The Front Runner is a critical and commercial bomb but whether it will still be in 22 theaters by the time “Vice” is released on Christmas Day. Starring Christian Bale as Dick Cheney, it’s this season’s other Oscar-bait American political biography movie.

    Reply

    • I don’t see Vice doing very well either. The budget is way too high for a Dick Cheney biopic. That being said, awards season doesn’t seem to be too competitive so far.

      Reply

      • Everything that seems to be hyped up this year before they come out die a somewhat quiet death, Green Book and First Man being the main ones that come to mind.

        Reply

      • We’re now a few days away from “Vice” going into wide-release and the reviews are mixed as are the reviews for “The Mule”. So much for the December release season, it looks like this year the strongest Oscar contenders for the Best Picture, Best Director, and the top acting awards were the movies released in November or earlier, like “A Star Is Born” and “Green Book”. There’s certainly no movie like “Titanic” or “Return of the King” that will dominate in Oscar nominations.

        Reply

  62. Box Office Mojo reports “Robin Hood” has grossed $14 million in its first 5 days of wide release in America and a few other countries on an estimated $100 million budget. It’s going to open in additional countries this upcoming weekend however, barring some kind of miracle for Lionsgate, there’s no way it will gross anywhere near $100 million.

    Reply

  65. Robin Hood was dead long before it hit theaters. Green Book as well. Nutcracker, Widows, Tyler Perry’s Nobody’s Fool. Crap crap crap!

    Reply

    • Just because a movie flops financially, that doesn’t mean that the movie isn’t good. Green Book and Widows are some of my favorite movies to come out this year.

      Reply

  66. With a total of 800k at 1k locations, it’s time to close ‘Green Book’. And with a take of 14m and a 100m budget, it looks like ‘Robin Hood’ is shot, too.

    Reply

    • Robin Hood is probably toast but still has plenty of countries to go and Green Book still has plenty of time to expand and recover.

      Reply

  68. Why do they bother to turn “The Nutcracker” into a movie? Every film version of the classic ballet has bombed miserably, including the Macaulay Culkin version and an ill-advised 3-D film. Now it’s Disney’s turn to find out that this property is box-office poison…

    Reply

  73. The Front Runner may be one of the worst awards busts in recent years. The opening for that one has just been atrocious.

    Reply

  76. First Man won’t finish it’s run worlwide until it gets released in Colombia, Japan and Argentina. I hope the WW saves this movie, as it did, thankfully, to Alpha.

    Reply

    • I don’t think that Widows is going to have a hard time doing that and I imagine that it will be playing for a while due to being one of the big Awards contenders. Instant Family will probably be another lesson in keeping the budget down. I mean, they spent $48 million on it! That’s way too high and I imagine it was mostly due to Wahlberg’s involvement.

      Reply

      • Widows is just whether the mainstream will embrace it. Mediocre Cinemascore might drag it down a bit. Instant Family seems to have good word of mouth, but it really should have cost half of what it does.

        Reply

  78. I just hate how all of these awful big cash grab movies reel in the money while actual good movies are left to the wayside.

    Suspiria was my second favourite movie of the year and it’s going to literally make make like 1 million dollars off of a 20 million budget not counting marketing.

    Reply

    • Amazon doesn’t really need it to make money, the goal is just to get people talking about their stuff and their service, along with getting you eventually hooked into the Prime system.

      Reply

      • Despite a way too long running time, Suspiria was such a fantastic watch. Completely bonkers filmmaking and I hope it gets a proper release in a few European markets.

        Reply

        • Saw Suspiria at a small arthouse this weekend and it stuck with me, saw Bohemian Rhapsody afterwards and thought it was totally boring and paint by numbers.

  80. I kind of envy all this big studio films or the Franchisee’s that make into breakeven even with Crappier films. I’m talking about Fantastic Beasts – Crimes of Grindelwald.

    Reply

  83. Mojo says “First Man” had a $59 Million production budget and took only $43.875 Million Domestic. It was moderately marketed so I’m only guessing but wouldn’t be surprised if those costs were around $20 Million. However, it looks like Foreign audiences ($50 Million) saved it from bombing. Should the studio thank the exclusion of an American flag-planting scene for that?

    Reply

    • I concur with multiple people here, First Man is a massive bomb and I’m puzzled why it is not included. Even the trades have mentioned it as a Gosling October bomb that looks set to lose $50 million plus for the studio. Also, the P&A expenditure for First Man was, very, splashy and is reported at $45 million, not $20 million. Furthermore, with taxes, etc. you only receive a small portion of the foreign box office intake. So, at $50 million, you are looking at around $30 million. In order to make a profit, First Man would have to take in about $120 to $150 million WW.

      Reply

      • Added it to pending. It still has some overseas markets left and if it lands nominations, it could capitalize off of that.

        Reply

        • Agreed. Unless it scores overseas(which is unlikely because of the heavy competition) and/or gets it’s Academy Award nominations, “First Man” is going to lose a decent amount of money for Universal. That is just sad. It only played at my local movie theater for two weeks, and when it got to it’s third week, it was gone! Even “Venom” is continuing to play at my local theater despite coming out before “First Man” did! It deserved to do better for sure.

      • It still has a good 5 territories that can add another $20 mn at the least. So i think it has a chance for not being on this list.

        Reply

        • The remaining territories for First Man are all very small and will contribute, at best, $5M. Patriotic themed films have never done well in those areas. China has already passed on a release date for it and is unlikely to reconsider. Also, there is no need to post multiple times under different names. We understand your point all the same and it isn’t going to change its likely addition to the list. There’s a reason why the industry trades have all included it as a bomb.

      • Mojo now reports “First Man” has reached $100.556 Million Worldwide so by your calculation yes it will fail to produce even a small profit. So I guess the debatable thing about it now is whether it’s just a regular bomb or a massive bomb.

        Reply

  85. Does anyone think Widows or The Girl In The Spider’s Web will end up here due to the competition? Maybe even Fantastic Beasts 2 due to mixed reviews.

    Reply

    • Widows should be fine assuming it doesnt completley flop next weekend. It did decently in the UK this week. Girl in the Spider’s Web is toast. Grindlewald will be saved by overseas but WB may want to reconsider the five film plan

      Reply

      • Why so pessimistic about FB2? WB expectations US opening are around $65 million, and there is a good start too overseas…

        Reply

        • Box Office predictions are now down a tiny bit to 60 million dollars on it’s opening weekend in the USA. It is a good start for sure, but considering that it cost a massive 200 million dollars to make, it might need to do better than that. Speaking of which, I saw “The Crimes Of Grindelwald” today. It’s not by any means an AWFUL sequel, but it’s very, VERY average. It has very little action compared to the first film(which I quite liked) and is quite boring in places. I still think it has enough legs to make it’s budget back in the USA, and it will do VERY well overseas, but I will agree, Warner Bros. might need to reconsider their 5 film strategy there. At least it was better than “Justice League”(despite opening with 30 million dollars more(90 million dollars), but costing 100 million dollars more(300 MILLION DOLLARS!).)!

      • Nothing would make me happier than adding another lousy, deep state worshiping Peter Berg movie to the site but it appears it did cost about $35M and not $50M. It was set up as a low budget feature, but when STX landed Wahlberg for 3/4 of his normal salary, the budget tripled to $35M. The poor reception hopefully killed off the planned trilogy.

        Reply

  89. What i think will be the flops list for this year: January: Proud Mary. February: Early Man. March: Death Wish, A Wrinkle In Time, Pacific Rim Uprising, Sherlock Gnomes. April: Sgt. Stubby An American Hero. May: Solo A Star Wars Story. June: Adrift, Action Point, Hotel Artemis, Superfly. August: The Spy Who Dumped Me, The Darkest Minds, Dog Days, Mike 22, Alpha, The Happytime Murders, A.X.L., Papillon, Kin. September: Peppermint, The Predator, White Boy Rick, Fahrenheit 11/9, Life Itself. October: Bad Times At The El Royale, Hunter Killer. November: The Nutcracker And The Four Realms, Overlord, Robin Hood. December: Mortal Engines, Welcome To Marwen. That’s 33 flops this year.

    Reply

  91. Well, I think Overlord is going to be on this list. I know it doesn’t come out until Friday but it costs $38 million and it has stiff competition. I just don’t see it doing well enough to make a profit. I’m surprised that Paramount didn’t just sell this one off to Netflux like they did with The Cloverfield Paradox.

    Reply

    • They could sell this to more of a cult audience and it also was higher quality. Might catch on what it comes out on home media.

      Reply

  95. Not according to BOM, also doesn’t scream to me as a international play. Has to make at least double globally to have a shot, and I personally don’t think the other territories will make up for it.

    And everyone who wonders if First Man was too political, it wasn’t that which killed it. The ads didn’t look interesting and neither was the film.

    Reply

    • In agreement with the other contributor, El Royale is not a bomb and will not make the list. It’s done enough to avoid the bullet already and films like that overindex in the secondary market. Does not fit the website’s criteria, which BOM supports. No need for further discussion about it.

      I also concur that First Man is dead and should be an immediate addition to the list. It’s another October bomb for Ryan Gosling. Hunter Killer is another one destined for the list.

      Reply

    • Has already made its $30 million budget back with more international territories to roll out. With SVOD, cable rights, and DVD sales it will be in the black. Not a bomb, and thus appropriately not on the list. First Man, however, has a great shot at making the list.

      Reply

      • As of 10/31 El Royale has grossed less than $28 million worldwide and is not likely to make much more. The studio will see back approximately $15.4 million of that. The production budget is $32 million not including P&A costs. The film will definitely not make back a penny of its production costs in release at the theater and will probably lose some of the P&A. It may not be considered a “bomb”, but it is still going to lose money even after VOD, cable and DVD/Blu sales.

        Reply

        • Your math is flawed at multiple points, but that’s a discussion for another venue. El Royale’s international rollout, which is slightly higher than you stated because boxofficemojo updates weekly, is in its beginning stages and will continue into next year. Currently, Its international totals are skewing identical to other similar films and there is no reason to believe VOD, cable, and DVD/blu sales won’t mirror those established comparisons. When all is finalized, it’ll certainly be in the black.

          But none of what I stated is particularly relevant in context to this website which declares if a movie is a bomb or not. As you stated yourself, and I agree, El Royale is not considered a bomb and, appropriately, will not be included on the list. That’s what’s important here, not trying to debate whose logic getting to the same conclusion is more exact.

      • Not sure where you find flawed math. You incorrectly stated that the movie had made its $30 Million dollar budget back. The studio has in fact only made back 55% of the film’s current grosses of around $28 million – which is $15.4 million. The budget has not been made back as P&A costs must be paid off first, and it is certain that they invested over $15.4 million in that area.

        The movie does have 6 more countries in which to open, however, they are not major markets. I agree they will help to partially pay down the production budget. Unless you are privy to the P&A spend on the movie it is impossible to tell how much of the budget will be met and state that the movie will certainly be in the black. That is all I was clarifying.

        Reply

        • P&A expenditures for every film are readily available and reported by the trades as well as websites such as the numbers. They are also reaffirmed in a studio’s quarterly profile. Again, I am not going to argue math with you because this is not the intention here. However, it is very possible to make conclusions on a film’s projection and potential profitability based on established trends and models. El Royale has made its $30M budget back already with international markets included and based on its model, will be in the black when VOD, cable, and streaming is included. There seems to be a misconception about concepts here, which is causing your confusion, but again that is for another venue.

          What is important here is your statement, which I agree with, that El Royale is not a bomb and will not be included on the list. I would also ask kindly to refrain from using multiple user names in this particular discussion. Especially one that is an, exact, duplication of someone else. It just confuses those who want to follow along.

    • Shine and London Fields are both budgeted well under $20 million so they won’t end up on this list. You’re right though, GVN is not doing well at all right now.

      Reply

  101. The way the new Johnny English movie coming out, looks like it’ll be another bust, since nobody didn’t care about the first two here in the US, anyway!!!

    Reply

      • True ! It already marked $100 mn International. Recovering to most of its costs . . . Film is budgeted around $45 mn.

        Release in US is only a name sake. The Reborn did only $8 mn final run in US.

        Reply

  102. It’s looks like First Man will avoid being listed here with $55 million worldwide after 8 days against a $59 budget.

    Reply

  106. Due to complications with Annapurna, Netflix was given the rights to broadcast MGM’s Operation Finale internationally. I do suspect that those rights would eventually go back to MGM becuz…..well, MGM is MGM.

    Reply

  111. Just so you know, I made the comment, so ignore “Anonymous”. Also, Smallfoot has made $110 million today so it does have a chance of breaking even. I didn’t know Annihilation was sold to Netflix internationally either, but it did fail at the US box office. Other than that, The Predator, A.X.L, and Gotti are definite flops.

    Reply

  112. Let us grieve for the loss of Bad Times at the El Royale, a Tarantino film with no Tarantino. May it become the cult classic that it deserves to be.

    Also, First Man needs legs to survive, because it didn’t do great this weekend.

    Reply

  114. More flops this year:
    Smallfoot (because Box Office Mojo did not have the production budget on their site, I had to check Google, and it has a budget of $80 million, and while it’s still in theaters, it has only grossed $88 million and keeps making less and less money)
    The Predator (budget of $88 million according to Box Office Mojo, and just like Smallfoot, it’s still in theaters, and it has only made $123 million, and people are losing interest in seeing it)
    Annihilation (budget of $40 million according to Box Office Mojo, made only $32 million)
    A.X.L (according to Google, it has a budget of around $10 million, and has only made $6 million)
    Mile 22 (closed domestic run, budget of $50 million according to Box Office Mojo, and made $59 million)
    Alpha (budget of $51 million according to Box Office Mojo, made $79 million)
    White Boy Rick (budget of $29 million according to Box Office Mojo, made $23 million)
    Gotti ($10 million budget according to Google, made $4 million)

    These pages should be added.

    Reply

    • Mile 22, Alpha, and White Boy Rick are up top as waiting for their international box office to be finished before being added. Annihilation was sold to Netflix internationally, so it’s probably fine financially. Feel like it’s too early to tell for Smallfoot, but I think it might break-even in the end.

      Reply

  115. Sherlock Gnomes was a flop? Wow! It was actually a good movie. My kids enjoyed it very much. Very surprising. I never heard of the Hurricane Heist movie. Probably explains why it flopped.

    Reply

  117. in November, i can see The Nutcracker And The Four Realms and Robin Hood flopping and in December, i can see Mortal Engines and Welcome To Marwen flopping.

    Reply

    • I agree.

      Disney has another “A Wrinkle In Time” in their hands with “The Nutcracker And The Four Realms”. It’s VERY obvious that the film cost at LEAST 100 million dollars to make, and I doubt it will make it back in the USA. And it will also have a hard time overseas due to all the competition it has, especially with it’s family audience(“The Grinch”(2018) and “Ralph Breaks The Internet”(the latter also coming from Disney)) and will end up losing money for Disney. Did I mention it looks like it focuses more on it’s visuals than it’s ACTUAL STORY?

      “Robin Hood”(2018) will do terribly for Lionsgate. I can easily tell that the budget was somewhere in the 90-100 million dollar range(which is admittedly less than the huge 200 million dollar budget that Ridley Scott’s “Robin Hood” film had(and that was from 8 years ago(2010). Of course, it also became a flop for Universal, but it was a rather small one at that.) and I think that the film will make around HALF of that worldwide. Add in the fact that there’s a TON of competition(“Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes Of Grindelwald”, “Creed II”, the aforementioned “Ralph Breaks The Internet”, and several others) and the film is destined for failure. And another franchise non-starter for Lionsgate. Not to mention that the film reminds me of the “King Arthur” film that became a MASSIVE flop last year. And NOT in a good way.

      “Mortal Engines” will just become another YA franchise non-starter, and will easily be lost and forgotten about during the holiday season. Sure, Peter Jackson is involved in the film(he produced the film and also wrote the script), but there are LITTLE TO NO big name stars(with Hugo Weaving being the ONLY big name actor in this film), a first time director(Christian Rivers, who before making this film, he only worked as a visual effects supervisor for Weta Digital), and the trailers constantly showing off the visuals more than the ACTUAL STORY, and that’s a big sign that the film is NOT going to end up well. Not to mention that this film has an estimated budget of 100 million dollars, which I’m very sure the film will not make back. Add in tons of competition that Christmas(“Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse”, “Mary Poppins Returns”, “Aquaman”, “Bumblebee”, and a few others), and this film is going to not last long in theaters. Enough said.

      “Welcome to Marwen” looks just plain ODD, and will also last for a short amount of time during the holiday season. Robert Zemeckis has been in a bad spot recently, with both “The Walk” and “Allied” flopping at the box office. Sure, the animation style the film is VERY unique, but it’s also very WEIRD as a result. I can see the film’s budget being somewhere in the 70-80 million dollar range, and I doubt it will make ANY of it back. Add in the competition that the film has(which I already talked about when I talked about “Mortal Engines”, so I will not talk about it again.) and this film will be another money loser for Universal. Speaking of Universal, yes! Both “Mortal Engines” and “Welcome to Marwen” are their big Christmas releases! And both of the will flop and lose money for them! Way to go!(of course, I was being sarcastic.)

      On the hand, let’s talk about the good stuff.

      “Bohemian Rhapsody” will end up making a clean profit for Fox, and Queen fans will definitely flock to see it.
      “The Grinch”(2018) will end up being another huge hit for Illumination/Universal.
      “Overlord” will be a sleeper hit for Paramount.
      “The Girl In The Spider’s Web” could make some money for Sony.
      “Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes Of Grindelwald” will become another box office winner for Warner Bros., and will be their highest grossing film this year.
      “Widows” will do well enough for Fox and will end up being talked about A LOT for next year’s Academy Awards.
      “Ralph Breaks The Internet” will be another hit for Disney.
      “Creed II” will do good enough at the box office for MGM.
      “Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse” will do VERY well for Sony and will end up being Sony Pictures Animation’s highest grossing film ever if it does well.
      “Mary Poppins Returns” will be a HUGE hit for Disney.
      “Aquaman” will make a good profit for Warner Bros.
      “Bumblebee” will make a solid profit for Paramount.

      And that’s just a few films!

      Reply

  120. The Predator isn’t showing a lot of growth from the last one in box office, so it may be a bomb.

    Reply

  121. After the early reviews on Venom . . . . . Do any of you think. It would be a probable scenario for it to be on this list.

    Reply

  124. If The Predator doesn’t start making more money overseas, it’s going to end up on here too. Once again, I guess most people aren’t interested in the Predator franchise.

    Reply

    • You mean Robin Hood, the film no one wants to see, might bomb?

      Have to say that it really has not done a good job in marketing. Looks too similar to the King Arthur movie last year.

      Reply

  128. The reason A Wrinkle In Time bombed was because the director found it necessary to change the book. Sure, she stuck to the basic story but she made a number of changes that DIDN’T follow the story to make it more “relatable” and to promote her own social agenda. Margaret Murry was described in the book as being skinny, freckled with mousy brown, stringy hair. The Murry family had two other children besides Meg and Charles Wallace–twins named Sandy & Denys. The Murry family lived in an old New England farmhouse NOT in LA. The three “witches” in the book first appeared to the Murry children as three old ladies–in particular, tramps or homeless people and not beautiful, made up creatures. While these details seem minor to some people, they make a difference in the “feel” of a movie. For those of us who actually read “A Wrinkle in Time” (along with the other three books in the series (A Wind in the Door, A Swiftly Tilting Planet, Many Waters etc.) it makes all the difference in the world. I also don’t feel it was necessary to change the race of the characters in order to make them “relatable”. Everyone on this planet who’s ever felt different, odd or that they just didn’t fit in and has been bullied for it can relate to Meg no matter what color they are. And the sideline about Meg’s bully feeling bad about herself by showing her alone in her room standing on the scale looking dejected NEVER appeared in the book either. If the director was trying to make her point, she beat it to death with a stick. I’m sure if Madeline L’Engle were alive she would tell you herself, “Don’t re-write my book!” Books like the Harry Potter series translated to audiences well because the author is still alive and could be consulted regarding the look of the actors, the set design, the special affects etc. Ms. L’Engle was totally against having her books set to film because she believed that a child’s imagination was limitless as to what the characters, the Murray’s home, the different planets and what it looked and felt like when you tesser couldn’t be captured on film. The only example of a children’s series of books that succeeded without being able to consult the author was C.S. Lewis’s, The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe and that was successful because they stuck to the story as it was written.

    Reply

    • It was a mixture of no one caring about the source material anyways now and the fact that all of the original spiritual context was deemphasized, alienating both the remaining few fans of the book and religious folks. Pure location and looks being changed aren’t really important, it’s the heart of the story that counts. Besides, skin color and location don’t seem to have been really key points in the first place.

      Reply

    • It dropped 87% because it lost over 1,500 theaters. Despite being in the minority that really enjoyed The Happytime Murders, it definitely deserves a spot on this list. There’s no way it will even make its budget back at this point.

      Reply

      • Based on the trailer & poster it was difficult to tell whether Happytime Murders is a police procedural, a comedy a thriller or a parody of one or more of these types of movies. This plus having dozens of other programs I can watch instead kept me away.

        Reply

      • This site needs to be updated. There are some glaring omissions, such as The Predator, The Sisters Brothers, and Bad Times at the El Royale. (I would also pay attention to First Man and Goosebumps 2 over the next few weekends as they are both underperforming.) Mile 22 ended its run already and White Boy Rick is toast so they should have articles by now.

        Reply

  134. The Predator is estimated to have a $24M Domestic opening (and $54M Worldwide opening) on a production budget of $88M. With a C+ Cinemascore.

    I think it’s gonna have a spot on this list, better keep a good eye on it.

    Reply

    • I really hope it doesn’t. I really enjoyed that the main cast of characters were all people with mental disorders and that they were portrayed in a positive way. (They were the badasses of the movie, especially the kid who was on the autism spectrum. I appreciated that as someone on the spectrum as well.) The movie wasn’t amazing but it was very entertaining and I want people to support more positive representation for people with mental disorders in film.

      Reply

      • Did we watch the same movie? Garbage, absolute garbage. Condescending towards just about everybody, and the dialogue/characters were atrocious. If it gets a sequel, I’ll be mad.

        Reply

        • The only character that they were even remotely condescending towards was the guy with Tourettes. Also, we differing opinions. I didn’t think The Predator was amazing but it was pretty entertaining to me and I enjoyed the fact that the lore was expanded.

  135. Alpha is showing a good sign at the China and Russia Box office. Seems like can pull off another $20 mn internationally and not prove a total bomb.

    Reply

        • My bad. I meant “original” but clearly used the wrong word. I was thinking more along the lines of being independent from any other franchise or source material. Clearly I forgot what website I’m on. Nothing gets past you guys 🙂

        • I will agree it’s always good to see original films succeed. And now that you explain it, I understand what you meant.

  137. God’s Not Dead 3: A Light In the Darkness bombed too: being up against I Can Only Imagine and Paul, Apostle of Christ did it no favors.

    Reply

  138. I think its safe to say The Spy Who Dumped Me is a bomb. It’s opened in all of its major markets, per IMDB, and has just broken 50 million on a 40 million dollar budget.

    Reply

    • There honestly isn’t too much in September that I see flopping. Most of what is in store for September looks like low to mid-budget fare. For starters, I think God Bless the Broken Road could flop. Sure, it has “God” in the title and it’s a Christian movie but even then, I haven’t even seen a SINGLE trailer for it. Peppermint could underperform under the weight of The Prradator. Likewise, I have seen no promotion for Hell Fest so I could see that flopping as well. Little Women may also go unnoticed due to a lack of interest from audiences but it honestly might not take much for it to make a profit.

      Reply

      • The Predator seems like it might bomb because of all the shifts in release date and a generally negative vibe around the film in general, with rumors of reshot endings and incredibly dumb plotlines. May be a case of okay box office being outweighed by exhorbitant costs, like Geostorm and that Wolfman movie a few years back. White Boy Rick and Life Itself are going to live or die by reviews, and The House with A Clock In Its Walls might be too weird to get parents to bring their kids to it. Assassination Nation seems like it’s trying to build up hype for a mediocre movie by being edgy, so we’ll see if the target audience eats it up or it’ll do mediocre business for its price tag.

        Reply

        • I actually think The House With a Clock in Its Walls will do just fine. It looks like a standard family film and it’s being heavily advertised. I could see The Predator flopping, especially if The Nun overperforms but it is one of the biggest movies playing in September.

        • “The Predator” is getting above average reviews from critics(63 percent Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes), but I’m still not sure how it’s going to do at the box office, despite Fox HEAVILY marketing the film and giving it a massive IMAX/Large Format release. “The House With A Clock In It’s Walls” will do just fine at the box office. Universal is heavily marketing the film, which is a good sign, it has two big names(Jack Black and Cate Blanchett)leading the film, and just like “The Predator”(but to a smaller extent), they are also giving it an IMAX release as well(with an IMAX 3D rerelease of “Thriller”(which is well known for being one of Michael Jackson’s famous songs, with an equally famous music video as well)attached to it(which was what caught my attention for the film).) We’ll see how they turn out overall at the box office.

  141. Look like Global Road have been going to the dogs lately!!! It’s seems that every movie they released so far belongs to the dogs!!! First, Show Dogs bombed, now AXL got stunk!!! And, I’m hope their next film featured a dog!!!

    Reply

    • The film distribution side of Global Road recently was seized by lenders, so this may be the end of Global Road.

      Reply

      • The best way to describe it?
        Global Road is exactly like The Weinstein Company, but the former only started business A YEAR AGO after IM Global and Open Road merged together. I wouldn’t be surprised if Global Road becomes bankrupt, just like The Weinstein Company. Shame.

        Reply

        • Eh, Global Road hasn’t put out anything great yet. Hotel Artemis was the best movie they put out so far and that was just okay at best.

        • The only reason TWC went bankrupt is because Harvey’s escapades got out and it looked bad to be involved with him, so banks weren’t willing to lend any more money. Global Road just never had the funding they said they did.

    • It’s a real shame that Happytime Murders isn’t getting a lot of love. In one of the few times I disagree with the critics, I thought the movie was absolutely hilarious. I saw it with a large group of friends and we all had a blast! I was laughing so hard I was crying on more than one occasion. If you like raunchy comedies, I absolutely recommend the movie.

      Reply

  143. Well, it looks like Mile 22 might end up on here. It made a little under $14m in its opening weekend but the budget is $50m. I doubt it will have legs due to the poor reviews and competition.

    Reply

  144. The Darkest Minds just posted the biggest third weekend theater drop ever. I think it’s safe to say it’s a flop – it’s just barely going to make back its budget through international gross.

    Reply

    • I’m not surprised AT ALL by this. I knew that the film’s box office is getting WORSE and WORSE. It IS doing a little(and I REALLY MEAN LITTLE)better overseas, making 18 million dollars(the film is making 12 million dollars in the USA so far), making the film hit the 30 million dollar mark WORLDWIDE. I think it will be a MIRACLE if the film even makes it’s 34 million dollar budget back WORLDWIDE. But that means it’s still a HUGE FLOP and it will be on the regular list no matter what.

      Reply

    • But no matter what, THAT is EXTREMELY embarrassing. Just breaking a record like that(for having the BIGGEST THIRD WEEKEND DROP OF ANY WIDE RELEASED MOVIE) is a major “Award Of Dishonor”. Add a MASSIVE 88 PERCENT DROP from it’s SECOND WEEKEND and a failure is ALREADY in store.

      Reply

      • I don’t know if I should LAUGH at this result, or feel SORRY for it. I know that the film was awful, and why A LOT of people didn’t even bother to see the film in theaters, but there is STILL a chance the film can still make money from home media sales and cable rights. Fox will lose millions of dollars from the film, that’s for sure. Still, I’m NOT done dealing with “The Darkest Minds” JUST YET. There’s still LOTS to be talked about, especially at the end of the year.

        Reply

        • Two more countries to open – Russia and Czech Republic. Neither major territories. It’s going to fail.

        • “The Darkest Minds” has hit the 35 million dollar mark, meaning that it has now made it’s 34 million dollar budget back. Worldwide. And from what I could tell, it has ended it’s theatrical run(at least in the USA). I think it will be on this list at any point!

        • Well, I wasn’t TOO far off. It hasn’t ended it’s theatrical run YET, but it lost more theaters, and played in only 172 theaters in it’s FOURTH WEEKEND. I still think that with how it’s going, this week(which is Labor Day weekend), it could end it’s theatrical run in the USA.

  145. Got a Hot One for you!!! Kevin Spacey’s Billionaire Boys Club! Grossed 287 in their opening weekend! No, not 287 Grand-287 BUCK$ ($36 per theatre)!!!

    Reply

  146. This may be a somewhat small film, but I still think it’s deserves a mention and might even break a box office “record”. With a budget of $15 million, “Billionaire Boys Club” got a whopping $126 on Friday, mostly due to poor reviews and the poorly timed inclusion of Kevin Spacey. To put it in comparison, the worst opening of all time in the U.S, United Passions, made around $319 in its Friday box office. It has gotten around $1,478,436 in the foreign market, but it’s doubtful it won’t bomb in a spectacular fashion.

    Reply

    • It’s too early to call it a flop yet. It is getting decent legs in the U.S. and there are some other countries that haven’t received the movie yet.

      Reply

    • It looks like a flop considering it’s in the 3rd week and there is no way it’s going to have 140M worldwide to cover its 70M investment.

      Reply

    • Well, it is super early but just going off of titles, release dates, actors, plot descriptions, and what I imagine the budgets are, here are my totally off the wall predictions:
      January: Ad Astra; Miss Bala
      February: Jacob’s Ladder; Three Seconds; The Prodigy
      March: Chaos Walking; The Kid Who Would Be King; Where’d You Go Bernadette
      April: After; Missing Link
      May: The Rosie Project; Uglydolls; The Sun is Also a Star
      June: Gambit; Shaft; Ford v. Ferrari
      July: Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
      August: Dora the Explorer; Artemis Fowl; Playmobil
      September: Charlie’s Angels
      October: Gemini Man; Are You Afraid of the Dark?; The Goldfinch
      November: Margie Claus
      December: Masters of the Universe

      Reply

      • Once Upon a Time in Hollywood’s Tarantino and stars, which both appeal to US and international audiences, and while it might not be a huge hit for Sony, it’ll probably at least justify its own existence. Missing Link will definitely bomb because Laika is just Nike’s founder’s son’s pet project and it really doesn’t need to make money for them to make more films.

        Reply

      • No offense, but I thought some of these movies would pull in the kids crowd and become decent hits. But, The Kid Who Would Be King comes out the same weekend as How To Train Your Dragon 3, for Missing Link, stop motion films don’t do well ( remember Kubo And The Two Strings and Early Man?) Even if Uglydolls comes out the same Weekend as Detective Pikachu and a week after Avengers, that could pull in the Trolls crowd. Dora could pull in the little kids crowd, Artemis Fowl will be next year’s A Wrinkle In Time ( dispite being Disney), as for Playmobil, ORF doesn’t have the best track record, don ‘t know about AYAOTD. This year, House With A Clock In It’s Walls won’t flop. Siabara.

        Reply

        • I’m secretly hoping that Dora the Explorer is a dumb action movie since Michael Bay is making it. Just imagine, Sniper instead of Swiper. “Sniper, no sniping!” xD

        • if you watch Collegehumor videos, you’ve already seen the trailer for the new Dora movie.

        • I was SURPRISED when I found out that a “Dora the Explorer” movie was actually being MADE(let alone coming out NEXT YEAR). I watched a lot of “Dora” when I was very little. I would love to see how it does at the box office. I’m not SUPER excited(especially since I’m not a huge fan of “Dora”(but then again, I outgrew Nick Jr.)for the movie, but I AM curious.

      • Ford Vs. Ferrari might hook the older crowd with the history and the younger ones with the stars. Hope it’s good from all the talent involved.

        Reply

  150. Here’s hoping ‘Mile 22’ ends up here. I though ‘AXL’ was a joke when I first saw a commercial for it.

    Reply

    • Mile 22’s probably in the $30 million range and will make money due to presales and not being priced too highly. Anything higher than $35 million, and it may not succeed. I’m guessing you just hate Mark Wahlberg.

      Reply

      • Looks like A.X.L.’s distributor, Global Road, is sinking like a rock too. Apparently, they’re struggling to get funding.

        Reply

        • I haven’t really cared for their movies so far. Midnight Sun was a typical romance movie, Hotel Artemis was decent but kinda forgettable, and Show Dogs was the worst movie I’ve seen this year so far.

        • “A.X.L” reminds me of both “Max Steel”(it helps that Global Road distributed that film(back when they were still Open Road)) and “Monster Trucks”. I can definitely see it becoming a flop at the box office. The trailer looks like a joke.

    • “A.X.L.” is all READY to become a box office flop. It has little big name stars, an unknown budget(I can see around 30-40 million dollars being spent for the film), and it wasn’t even screened for critics. Big loss right there.

      Reply

  151. Alpha seems to be on track for this. Less than $10 million opening and looks like it cost a whole lot more than that. China’s box office is going to have to be on fire for Alpha to avoid being a flop.

    Reply

    • The problem is that the budget for Alpha is unknown for now. I do feel like the budget is really high. I plan on seeing it in 3D because I hear that it’s one of the few movies in years that is actually worth shelling out 3D for.

      Reply

      • “Alpha” has an 80 million dollar budget. It’s not very expensive, but it’s still FAR from cheap. I’m surprised that it ACTUALLY got decent reviews from critics. Sony just kept MOVING THE RELEASE DATE OVER AND OVER until they settled for the August dumping ground. No wonder it’s going to be a HUGE flop.

        Reply

        • I gotta say, having seen the movie, Sony really dropped the ball on the marketing. They made it look like a cheesy Ice Age movie you would catch on Freeform. In reality, it’s an epic survival movie (it’s mostly subtitled which was refreshing for a prehistoric movie) that is hands down one of the most gorgeous movies of the year. The trailers don’t do it justice at all. It is worth IMAX or 3D. It really caught me off guard how compelling the movie really is. It is so sad that this is going to be overlooked hard due to Crazy Rich Asians (which is also really good) and Mile 22 (a scattershot mess of an action movie) coming out the same weekend.

        • Tristan, you should watch Alpha to get that bland taste of The Darkest Minds out of your mouth.

        • You can blame the terrible box office results on the ABYSMAL marketing campaign Sony gave the movie. They treated it like a generic “historic” drama AND a nature documentary. The favorable reviews the film got would have made me change my mind, but… …I’ll just leave it as is. I think the MCU 10th anniversary IMAX compilation(I’m seeing(at least in IMAX) “Guardians of the Galaxy”, “Thor: Ragnarok”, and “Black Panther”(the latter film I saw earlier this year)) will wash the bad taste of “The Darkest Minds” out of my movie going mouth.

        • I may have avoided it in theaters, but I MIGHT check out “Alpha” at some point. Probably when it comes out on home media. I’m ACTUALLY sad that it flopped, despite getting fairly strong reviews from critics. But that might be because of, like I said, the ABYSMAL marketing campaign Sony gave it. I heard that ALL of the film was subtitled(which is RARE for a big film made in the USA), and the film looks STUNNING and is ACTUALLY WORTH SEEING IN 3D. In fact, that film MAY have taken the bad taste “The Darkest Minds” gave in my mouth, IF I ACTUALLY SAW IT. But nope. Both “The Darkest Minds” and “Alpha” ended up being box office flops.

      • If you thought the regular ads were bad, the spotify ads have been atrocious. Makes it sound like a film for five year olds, as it’s supposed to be “the most heartwarming film of the summer” or some garbage like that. Was going to watch it anyways, but the reviews ensured I’ll get around to it, hopefully before it leaves theaters completely.

        Reply

        • Yeah, it’s not exactly a movie for five year olds. In fact, it reminds me of The Revenant except it’s during the Ice Age, not as graphic, and way shorter. If you do check it out (and I totally recommend that you do), make sure to watch it in 3D or IMAX. It’s worth every penny and looks absolutely gorgeous.

        • Also, for the record, “the most heartwarming movie of the summer” for me was probably Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again of all things. I was not expecting it to be as good as it was considering I didn’t care for the first one.

    • It made 44 million dollars on it’s opening weekend in the USA alone. And nearly everyone said that the film was going to make less than HALF of that(20 million dollars) and flop. FLOP NO MORE IT IS, WARNER BROS.!

      Reply

      • I just got back from seeing “The Meg”. It’s NOTHING amazing, but it is silly fun. I’m actually glad it was able to defy expectations with it’s solid 45 million dollar opening weekend in the USA(the previous numbers were before the actual numbers came.). Now I have to wait a few more hours… …because I’m FINALLY going to see “The Darkest Minds”. And my few words? Oh no… …give me hope… And I will come back once the film is finished. I will type up my thoughts on it.

        Reply

        • @ Tristan Michaels you are probably going to be the only person in the theater for The Darkest Minds. XD.

        • I’m embarrassed to admit, I WASN’T the only person in the theater for “The Darkest Minds”. The theater that I was in(which was very small) was actually packed! It was almost sold out! Almost ALL of the people in the theater were around my age(15 to 16 years old)! And I actually heard a round of APPLAUSE at the VERY end of the movie(right when the credits started)! I was SURPRISED that they were actually able to ENJOY meaningless films like this! I heard people laughing(and even sad crying) while I was BORED OUT OF MY MIND(no pun intended.)! Why? The film already does an EXCELLENT job of pandering to it’s teenage target audience, but I was surprised that it MORE THAN DID IT’S JOB! It’s unbelievable! I think this film should be on the main list at any point!

        • I’m ALMOST certain that the theater I saw “The Darkest Minds” in was the exception. I saw that film on a Discount Day(which was on a Tuesday), so I was THANKFUL that I didn’t waste my time seeing the film in full price(but then again, I also saw “The Emoji Movie” ON A DISCOUNT DAY. HISTORY REPEATS!(at least that film was successful despite getting abysmal reviews from well, pretty much EVERYONE who saw it(who wasn’t their family target audience).)And in fact, everyone who was in theater saw it with Discount Day. If I saw the film on a normal day(in FULL PRICE, NO LESS!), the theater would have been TOTALLY EMPTY. I knew that it lost almost of it’s theaters and is now playing in almost 450 empty theaters. I think that this week, the film will PROBABLY end it’s theatrical run. That’s just my guess, though. Who knows? It could be playing for a little longer before FINALLY ending it’s theatrical run.

    • Christopher Robin needs 150 million $ to break even ( according to Tristan Micheals it’s 210). Slenderman’s budget is 28 million $ so you might be right.

      Reply

    • “Slender Man” might overperform with 11-12 million dollars on it’s opening weekend(which isn’t TOO bad, since it cost almost 30 million dollars to make), but it got awful reviews from critics and Sony kept the film away for a few months because of “disagreements”, and didn’t go back to marketing the film until a MONTH ago.(Doesn’t help that I got constant ads for both this film and “The Darkest Minds” on YouTube. It’s clear that both Sony and Fox respectively knew that both films would be terrible.). An awful D- CinemaScore is not helping matter for this film either. The word is still out on “Christopher Robin”. It has a nearly 50 percent drop with around 12 million dollars in the USA. There is still a high chance for the film to hit the 80(or possibly 90 to 100 million if it’s lucky) million dollar mark in the USA, but if the overseas box office for this film continue to be as non existent as they already are, sorry to say, it could be on this list.

      Reply

    • It did alright on it’s opening weekend in the USA(25 million dollars, which for a film that had a moderate budget(75 million dollars), is nothing amazing, but not too bad either), but it’s overseas results(so far) are VERY limited, which just 5 million dollars. If it stumbles in the USA, or has weak overseas box office results, it could be on the list. But hey, the film was cute! And Disney has the money they made from “Black Panther”, “Avengers: Infinity War”, “Incredibles 2”, and “Ant-Man and The Wasp” to help fix things up. Speaking of which, CONGRATUATIONS “Black Panther” FOR FINALLY HITTING THE 700 MILLION DOLLAR MARK IN THE USA AND “Incredibles 2” FOR HITTING THE BILLION DOLLAR MARK WORLDWIDE!

      Reply

      • Hey Tristan, I realized it needs at least 150 million $ worldwide to double it’s budget. Fun fact, it made the same amount as The Emoji Movie on it’s OW.

        Reply

        • It’s going to need MORE than that to break even. Disney spent a decent amount of money(from what I can tell) to market the film(they probably spent around 50 to 60 million do so, in addition to the 75 million dollars it cost to make), and they need the marketing costs back as well for the film to make a profit and make even. I will say that 210 million dollars is a better break even point. But considering that overseas box office results for the film are non existent, it’s going to need A LOT of luck to do so.

        • I think it will need a little more than 150 million dollars to break even. In addition to the 75 million dollars Disney spent to make the film, they spent a decent amount of money(from what I could tell)(around 50 to 60 million dollars) to market the film as well. I think that 210 million dollars will be a better break even point for this film. But with non existent overseas numbers so far, I’ll doubt it will make it.

  157. Just wanted to report on a new bomb I found: Escape Plan 2: Hades. The film had a $20M budget, but only made $14,208,277 in it’s full worldwide run. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_Plan_2:_Hades). I will say that it apparently didn’t have a domestic release ,or at least any tracking of how much it made if it did have a release so I don’t know if that excludes, but I still wanted to let you know.

    Reply

  158. The Spy Who Dumped Me needs a page. it made 12 million $ on a 40 million $ budget. Sadly possibly Christopher Robin too due to making less than the 30-29 million $ and it has a 75 million $ budget. so, siabara.

    Reply

  159. It may be a bit too early, but I think The Darkest Minds will be a box office bomb. With a $34M budget, it is estimated to gross just $6M in it’s opening weekend.With it’s terrible reviews, I doubt it’ll leg out to gain enough money and there doesn’t seem to be any release worldwide so it should have a good shot on making this list. Just a heads up. Keep up the good work!

    Reply

  160. I have no idea what A.X.L.’s budget is but I feel pretty confident that it will have a future spot on this list.

    Reply

    • I think most of the box office bombs are coming towards the end if the year. A lot of movies are releasing in October and don’t get me started on the crap ton of big budget movies releasing near Christmas. There’s no way they are all going to survive. But so far this year, the box office has been pretty decent so far. Solo was probably the biggest surprise in how much it underperformed but it released at a really bad time, facing heavy direct competition and people who were still salty about The Last Jedi (which came out only 5 months before Solo).

      Reply

  162. Skyscraper has now got past it’s break even point of 250 million $, so NO WAY it’s ending up in here now.

    Reply

  163. This month, I could see The Darkest Minds, The Meg, Alpha, A.X.L., and Kin all flopping. The only one with a known budget right now is The Meg ($150 million) and that could be saved by China. The Darkest Minds will be crushed by the other action movies out right now, Alpha has been pushed back multiple times by Sony, A.X.L. just looks like a lower budget version of Monster Trucks but with a robot dog, and Kin hasn’t been gaining a whole lot of buzz.

    Reply

    • Happytime Murders might be too niche to make money too. Sure, it has Melissa Mccarthy, but it seems like a weird place to go with muppets.

      Reply

        • It could just be me but I know quite a bit of people who know what Happytime Murders is and I am going to see it with a whole group of people when it comes out. I don’t think it will make as much as Sausage Party but I do think it will be a decent hit. Plenty of people like out of the box ideas.

      • “The Meg” is continuing to do well at the box office. “The Darkest Minds” already became a MAJOR flop for Fox, and based on how it’s doing, I won’t see it doing better anytime soon(though Fox still might make money from the film if it has good home media sales). “Alpha” is already flopping at the box office, making around 10 million dollars in it’s opening weekend(on a film that cost around 50-80 million dollars to make). I can see both “A.X.L” and “Kin” becoming major box office flops.

        Reply

    • “The Darkest Minds” has a 34 million dollar budget, which is a very small amount of money for a YA adaptation and a effects heavy film(even the last two “Maze Runner” films cost over 60 million dollars to make), but it will only make around 8 million dollars in it’s domestic opening weekend, and even with it’s limited budget, it’s still not a good start. Another thing I’m worried about is that both “The Darkest Minds” AND especially “Christopher Robin”(which I’m seeing tomorrow) don’t have their Rotten Tomatoes scores yet, AND it’s only one more DAY before they come out. I know that Disney is trying their best with the latter film(they have been heavily marketing it), and believe it or not, one of their most critically and successful films, “Star Wars: The Force Awakens”, WASN’T EVEN SCREENED FOR CRITICS UNTIL IT WAS RELEASED(but that was to avoid spoilers and NOT the quality of the actual film)! But still, I’m worried.

      Reply

      • “Christopher Robin” finally got it’s Rotten Tomatoes score(ONLY HOURS BEFORE IT CAME OUT!). 62 percent Fresh. It’s nowhere near the level the “Paddington” films were on Rotten Tomatoes(98 percent and 100 PERCENT Certified Fresh!), but it’s passible enough. I heard that it is SLOW PACED, but it is innocent and cute natured. I’m going to check it out for myself in a few hours. By the way, “The Darkest Minds” had gotten it’s Rotten Tomatoes score a while ago, and IT IS NOT GOOD. 14 PERCENT ROTTEN. But then again, it helps that I wasn’t even that interested in that film anyway. It looked like a lesser combination of the “X-Men” series(even more so since Fox distributed both films) and “The Hunger Games”. Aside from “Ready Player One”(yes, that was a YA adaptation, and even though the book it was based off was targeted to(mostly) pop culture fans, it was also targeted to young adults as well.)(and that film did well because… …well, it was from Spielberg! And it did MASSIVE in China as well!), YA adaptations(since the last “Harry Potter” and “The Hunger Games” films) are struggling, both with the critics and box office, and I can definitely see “The Darkest Minds” being a flop as a result. Aside from “Christopher Robin”(“Eighth Grade” doesn’t count because it was in limited release for a few weeks before it expanded to wide release this week), all of the other films that came out this week were Rotten on Rotten Tomatoes. A lackluster week indeed.

        Reply

  164. Netflix bought Mowgli from WB, which means they thought it was probably going to be a flop. Got saved from being on here.

    Reply

    • The 100% it doesn’t deserve the last Jedi had good reviews but nobody liked it same fate will be with this movie

      Reply

      • You can’t judge a movie you haven’t watched. I myself think that the show the movie is based off of is garbage. That being said, the writing for the movie looks like it’s going to be much better. The last trailer they put out I found very funny. Also, with the budget being low, it will make a profit easily.

        Reply

      • Rotten tomatoes is a measure of how many people liked it, not how much. Most of those last Jedi reviews were just okay with it, probably the same for teen titans

        Reply

        • I wish more people understood how RT ratings worked. You summed it up well. Looking at the average ratings are probably more accurate than the percentage.

    • Depends on how good of a deal they got for Netflix. It seems like it at least broke even. It was one of the few movies I liked in a pretty weak year so far, shame it didn’t do better.

      Reply

  172. Here is a list of movies I’ve found that I believe to be box office bombs:

    Higher Power by Matthew Santoro
    Budget: Supposedly $500K (http://www.syfy.com/syfywire/higher-power-the-vfx-rich-sci-fi-thriller-that-was-made-on-a-500000-budget)
    Box Office: Domestic = $528, Foreign = ???

    Marrowbone by Sergio G. Sánchez
    Budget: €8 million (est. $9.9 million)
    Box Office: Domestic = $1,377, Foreign = €9,549,990 ($11,164,683)

    Kickboxer Retaliation by Dimitri Logothetis
    Budget: $13 million
    Box Office: Domestic = $4,537, Foreign = $39,356 (https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Kickboxer-Retaliation#tab=summary)

    Woman Walks Ahead by Susanna White (Still in Theaters)
    Budget: $5 million
    Box Office: Domestic = $6,863, Foreign = ???

    Blood Feast by Marcel Walz
    Budget: $1.2 million
    Box Office: Domestic = $8,708, Foreign = None

    The Assasin’s Code by David A. Armstrong
    Budget: $1.8 million
    Box Office: Domestic = $11,218, Foreign = ???

    Freak Show by Trudie Styler
    Budget: $2 million
    Box Office: Domestic: $18,216, Foreign: $961

    The House of Tomorrow by Peter Livolsi
    Budget: $8.6 million
    Box Office: $6.9 million (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_House_of_Tomorrow_(2017_film))

    How To Talk To Girls At Parties by John Cameron Mitchell
    Budget: $3.8 million (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Talk_to_Girls_at_Parties_(film))
    Box Office: Domestic = $84,809, Foreign = $223,268 (https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/How-to-Talk-to-Girls-at-Parties#tab=summary)

    Goldstone by Ivan Sen
    Budget: $2 million
    Box Office: Domestic = $86,402, Foreign = $583,515 (I got the Domestic box office from Box Office Mojo and I got the foreign box office from The Numbers)

    Reign of Judges: Title of Liberty – Concept Short by Darin Southam (Still in Theaters)
    Budget: $120,000
    Box Office: Domestic = $93,224, Foreign = $5,184

    Golden Slumber by Noh Dong-seok
    Budget: $12.75 million (or ₩14,222,369,366 in South Korea) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Slumber#Box_office)
    Box Office: Domestic: $94,450, Foreign = $10,733,326 (or ₩11,972,809,953)

    Revenge by Coralie Fargeat
    Budget: $2.9 million (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenge_(2017_film))
    Box Office: Domestic = $102,091, Foreign = $228,490

    The Guardians (Les Gardiennes) by Xavier Beauvois
    Budget: $10.5 million (or €8.9 million) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardians_(2017_film))
    Box Office: Domestic = $137,054, Foreign = $3,944,048 (or €3,358,297) (https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Gardiennes-Les-(France)#tab=summary)

    The Young Karl Marx by Raoul Peck
    Budget: $11.2 million (or €9.5 million) (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1699518/)
    Box Office: Domestic = $125,659, Foreign = $4,226,849 ( or €3,599,097) (https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Jeune-Karl-Marx-Le-(France)#tab=summary)

    Double Lover (L’Amant Double) by François Ozon
    Budget: $8.3 million (or €7.1 million)
    Box Office: Domestic = $167,581, Foreign = $4,688,606 (or €3,992,277)

    Zama by ‎Lucrecia Martel
    Budget: Supposedly $3.5 million (https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2018/04/zama-movie-review-lucrecia-martel)
    Box Office: Domestic = $194,441, Foreign = $406,741

    Borg vs McEnroe by Janus Metz Pedersen
    Budget: $7.5 million (or 65 million SEK)
    Box Office: Domestic = $231,346, Foreign = $3,014,135 (or 26,300,733 SEK)

    But Deliver Us from Evil by Joshua Coates
    Budget: $1 million
    Box Office: Domestic = $285,169, Foreign = No Release

    Flower by Max Winkler
    Budget: $500K (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flower_(film))
    Box Office: Domestic = $328,188, Foreign = $51,983 (https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Flower-(2017)#tab=summary)

    Bag of Marbles (Un Sac De Billes) by Christian Duguay
    Budget: $21.4 million (or €18,205.839)
    Box Office: Domestic = $393,070, Foreign = $10,045,370 (or €8,545,999) (http://www.jpbox-office.com/fichfilm.php?id=16594)

    Condorito: La Pelicula by Alex Orrelle
    Budget: $8.3 million
    Box Office: Domestic = $447,719, Foreign = $7,983,475

    The Insult (L’insulte) by Ziad Doueiri
    Budget: $3 million (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7048622/)
    Box Office: Domestic = $1,001,305, Foreign = $1,878,414

    Lean on Pete by Andrew Haigh
    Budget: $8 million (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lean_on_Pete)
    Box Office: Domestic = $1,163,056, Foreign = $1,087,674 (https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Lean-on-Pete-(UK)#tab=summary)

    Thoroughbreds by Cory Finley
    Budget: $5.4 million (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoroughbreds_(2017_film))
    Box Office: Domestic = $2,830,775, Foreign = $71,585 (https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Thoroughbreds#tab=summary)

    Disobedience by Sebastián Lelio (Still In Theaters)
    Budget: $6 million
    Box Office: Domestic = $3,467,378, Foreign = $1,814,821

    Gotti by Kevin Connolly (Still In Theaters)
    Budget: $10 million
    Box Office: Domestic = $4,183,395, Foreign = ???

    Hotel Artemis by Drew Pearce (Still In Theaters)
    Budget: $15 million
    Box office: Domestic = $6,656,011, Foreign = $1,393,586 (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=hotelartemis.htm)

    Annihilation by Alex Garland
    Budget: $40–55 million
    Box Office: Domestic = $32,732,301, Foreign = $10,140,000

    Pacific Rim: Uprising by Steven S. DeKnight (Still In Theaters)
    Budget: $150-170 million (According to Deadline Hollywood, it needs $350M to break even) (https://deadline.com/2018/03/pacific-rim-uprising-black-panther-weekend-box-office-1202352184/)
    Box Office: Domestic = $59,185,715, Foreign: $230,875,582

    I would might also add Superfly which has a budget of $16 million and so far brought in $19 million at the box office, but I can’t confirm that.

    (I also wanted to point out that a lot of these movie I listed were films that were either limited release in certain film festivals from 2017 or released in other countries in 2017. These films were then open in American theaters in 2018 so I don’t know if those count as 2017 bombs or 2018 bombs. The films that were released solely this year from this list were Higher Power, Kickboxer: Retaliation, The Assasin’s Code, Reign of Judges: Title of Liberty – Concept Short, Golden Slumber, Gotti, Hotel Artemis, Annihilation, and Pacific Rim: Uprising. Blood Feast and Goldstone were the only films on this list to have a limited release in 2016.)

    I hope that this list is helpful to you and I apologize for any mistakes as I’m new to this. I think that you have done a great job with updating all the box office bombs for the past decade and I wish you good luck for finding any other films.

    Reply

    • The guy who does these typically tends to focus on big releases, so the majority of your suggestions probably won’t get used

      Reply

    • Thanks for your compliment Cutthroat Island. We are adding movies with budgets around or above $20 million and have been removing older posts with movies that have lower budgets. Thanks for your comment and glad you are enjoying the site!

      Reply

      • Thank you Bomb Report! Sorry that most of the list doesn’t work with that rule, but still will continue to look for any that follow it. You do work hard and am glad that you have continued the hard work.

        Reply

  174. Sicario: Day of the Soldado might be in trouble if it doesn’t pick up the slack. It had a terrible 60%+ second weekend drop.

    Reply

    • It might be able to limp its way to the first film’s gross, but the word of mouth hasn’t been stellar. We may get a third one, since this series only exists on the whims of the daughter of FedEx’s founder, so she has millions to throw away on this.

      Reply

      • I sure hope so. Sicario 2 is one of the best movies of the year in my opinion and I would be totally down for a third one. I think a lot of people were turned off with how depressing the movie is but it’s about the drug cartel so I don’t know what people were expecting.

        Reply

  175. Pacific Rim Uprising:

    Estimated budget $150-$175 mil
    Box office: $290.1 mil
    Estimated break-even: $350 mil

    Seems floppish to me

    Reply

  176. Does anybody think that either Skyscraper or The Equalizer 2 is going to flop? They come out just weeks before Mission: Impossible – Fallout, which I expect to be one of the biggest movies of the summer due to the track record of Mission: Impossible, Tom Cruise, and heavy advertising.

    Reply

    • Dylan W how do you think Alpha, The Happytime Murders, The House With A Clock In It’s Walls, Mowgli, and Welcome To Marwen will flop? They haven’t even revealed their budgets yet.

      Reply

      • I’m not sure about the others but I don’t think that Happytime Murders will flop at all. I think it might pull in the Sausage Party crowd and become a decent hit actually.

        Reply

        • i agree, even though “Muppets Most Wanted” was a flop. but “Sausage Party” was a hit with that crowd though. i think Alpha could flop though. i think Mowgli too since Disney already turned The Jungle Book story into live action and it has to compete with the Halloween remake which i think will be this year’s ‘It’. The House With A Clock In It’s Walls could do well with the target audience, but comes out a week before the animated “Smallfoot”. Welcome To Marwen has 2 compete with the 4 holiday movies (Timmy Sargent and Tristan Micheals said what they are), but with the director and the animation, it could be another Isle Of Dogs. You’ll find out soon enough.

      • Marwen is trying to go for that feel good movie aspect that middle America loves, but the actual story has enough weird detours that unless they are severely downplayed, it will be too controversial for that group. Not to mention that the animation style feels off along with the whole vibe of the film. Mowgli’s been delayed so much, it’s probably already being internally written off. Alpha’s been pushed around a lot too.

        Reply

    • Skyscraper has The Rock, so it’ll do well overseas at least. Equalizer 2 has Denzel Washington, who’s one of the few real “movie stars” left, and the first one did well enough. Probably won’t justify a 3rd, but will probably make back its budget

      Reply

    • It’s a shameful failure. Disney managed to screw up one of the few sure things in the world.

      Reply

    • Sad to see the FIRST EVER “Star Wars” BOX OFFICE FLOP. At least that’s not going to affect Disney(thanks to “Incredibles 2”, “Avengers: Infinity War”, and “Black Panther”)or the upcoming “Star Wars” film that’s coming out next year. It will still do HUGE business for Disney, even after the polarizing fan response “The Last Jedi” got and “Solo” flopping at the box office. If “Solo” was moved back and released in December, it would have been another story. It would have done very well at the box office and would have probably made a billion dollars. Releasing it in May(when “Avengers: Infinity War” and “Deadpool 2” were dominating the box office) was a VERY bad move. Even with the heavy competition with “Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse”, “Aquaman”, “Bumblebee”, and “Mary Poppins Returns”(which, ironically enough, is also from Disney)(those four are probably the only films that will do well on the 2018 holiday season). The film was also fairly well received by critics, so… how it flopped… …I could imagine… …people just weren’t interested? I don’t know.

      Reply

      • I have to disagree with some of your points. Long term getting Star Wars out of December is the right move for Disney even if it’s not best for Star Wars. Why? Because Disney has TONS of four quadrant family friendly IPs that will play spectacularly during the holiday season, like for example Mary Poppins which you mention. There are even better examples. How much money could Beauty and the Beast have gotten if it came out in the holiday frame? Unfortunately Jedi was in the way and so it was never an option. Disney understands that their overall slate is better off with Star Wars in the summer with the holiday frame left open for the type of big family friendly entertainment that Disney does so well.

        Reply

        • Well, I both sort of agree and disagree with those points you mentioned. For the “four quadrant family friendly IPs” you mentioned, there aren’t REALLY many of those. They’re just holdovers from November(like “Frozen”, “Moana”, or “Coco”), and Disney focuses mostly on “Star Wars” for December. Yes, I will agree that these IPs do have SPECTACULAR box office results, and like you said, I do have bets that “Mary Poppins Returns” will do VERY well over the holiday season. I just had different thoughts, but I do get some of your thoughts. Still, I’m glad that Disney has a lot of HUGE, money making IPs under their company.

  182. Better look out for John Travolta’s Gotti, which so far is getting a BIG FAT ZERO rating on Rotten Tomatoes!!! Too much fiction and hardly any facts!!!

    Reply

  183. Well, Hotel Artemis looks like it’s going to bomb. It’s only expected to pull in $3-3.5 million in its opening weekend off a $15 million budget.

    Reply

  185. Where’s Chappaquiddick on this list? It did better than it was projected to but it still couldn’t even top its $34 million production cost.

    Reply

    • Chappaquiddick did not cost $34M. It’s an inexpensive indie. Here’s how we got to that $34M number — Variety had an article (https://variety.com/2018/film/box-office/chappaquiddick-box-office-1202742903/) about Chappaquiddick before it opened and in that article another political drama Detroit was mentioned. Variety stated that the budget to Detroit was $34M. Google meta-descriptions picked up the $34M budget from the variety article and assigned it to Chappaquiddick for search results. Then The Boston Globe wrote some brief article and cited the $34M budget. Then someone added the $34M budget to the Chappaquiddick wikipedia page and cited The Boston Globe and now its circulating that the budget is $34M.

      Reply

  190. Solo is the worst performing star wars movie ever it is projected to have only a 105m opening on a 250m budget with 500m needed to break even and its underproming outside of america with record low in china and japan and noone watching it in England it is almost certain to bomb just look out for the sales

    Reply

    • Needs a lot more than $500 million to break even. Budget was $300m. Total cost is usually twice that to include marketing, so $600m. Studios only get half of box office receipts in US and 25% abroad. If we go with a typically even split of domestic and foreign then the break even point would be $1.6 BILLION. (800m * .5 + 800m * .25) = 600m. And that’s with zero profit.

      Reply

        • That was the consequence of releasing the film FIVE MONTHS after “The Last Jedi”. “Solo” will be the “Justice League” of 2018 for sure. Too bad, since I thought it was good(even if it is the weakest “Star Wars” film from Disney so far.). At least Disney has the HUGE box office receipts of “Avengers: Infinity War” and “Black Panther” to cover up ANY of “Solo” ‘s potential losses. And Disney also has “Incredibles 2” coming out in a few weeks, and that film will be a HUGE hit at the box office(and with the critics, too! It’s also from Pixar, after all!). I’m glad Disney is still doing fine. Even if “Solo” made less than their 150 million dollar 4 day prediction.

    • Tomb Raider apparently needed $275 million to break even. Its worldwide gross so far is $273 Million, and it’s coming to Digital formats and Blu-Ray/DVD in a week or two; so it’s may squeak in just enough to break even or to make a small profit.

      I wouldn’t blame you for considering it a BO disappointment, though.

      Reply

  193. Look like Show Dogs isn’t the only Big Loser to competed against Deadpool 2. How about Jim Carrey’s Dark Crime, which got a BIG FAT ZERO rating on Rotten Tomatoes (As I write this one)!!!

    Reply

  195. So, Show Dogs is shaping up to be a flop. It’s a shame I can’t find info on the budget. The attempt at counterprogramming is gonna flop hard.

    Reply

    • Me too. That film(“Show Dogs”) looks absolutely awful. “Avengers: Infinity War”(despite it’s SERIOUS subject matter) will take always a lot of that film’s audience for sure(of course, “Deadpool 2”, like it’s predecessor, is ABSOLUTELY, POSTIVELY, NOT FOR CHILDREN!(but it will be a huge hit at the box office, and it has already gotten strong reviews(87 percent Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes) from critics as well.(Of course, I’m only 15 years old, so I can’t see it yet!).

      Reply

    • It’s a leftover from the previous owners of the company. Being dumped so that they can move on to their other films, like Hotel Artemis.

      Reply

      • And the film(“Show Dogs”) had an abysmal 6 million dollar opening weekend and has the 13th WORST opening weekend for a film playing in over 3,000 theaters. Even “Diary of a Wimpy Kid: The Long Haul”(which is 24th on the worst opening weekend for a film playing in over 3,000 theaters, just one spot down 25th)(which came out EXACTLY a year ago) was able to do better(but only SLIGHTLY) than this film(7 million dollars) on it’s opening weekend. Overseas numbers also look extremely horrendous as well(almost 700 THOUSAND dollars!). So, looks like it has a chance on this list?

        Reply

  197. With Deadpool 2 coming next week, I feel like either Book Club or Show Dogs is going to bomb, possibly even both of them. I think that Show Dogs is more likely but I have seen it more heavily advertised than Book Club so who knows.

    Reply

    • Book Club seems to have been not that expensive, so probably will appeal to its audience and break even.

      Reply

  198. Can we just bite the bullet and put Ready Player One on this list already? It cost $175 million production budget plus $150 million marketing expense. But it was overshadowed and outgrossed in the US by a low budget horror film, A Quiet Place. A Quiet Place earned more money almost every single day, including opening weekend, than Ready Player One did. RPO’s biggest success was in China but that only lasted a couple of weeks before local films started stealing audiences away. Though it’s above $500 million total worldwide, it’s still not enough to cover the production+marketing cost once ticket sales revenue is split between the studio and the cinemas.

    Reply

      • The film(“Ready Player One”) has made almost 575 million dollars worldwide so far, WELL over it’s break even point of 440 million dollars(even if it had to compete with “A Quiet Place”, and(of course) “Avengers: Infinity War”.) No WAY it will be on this list for sure.

        Reply

  199. Traffik only cost $4 million to make so it’s not a huge loss. I saw it myself and I personally thought it was better than what the critics led on.

    Reply

    • Two Words. ABSOLUTELY NOT! It broke the record for the BIGGEST DOMESTIC OPENING WEEKEND OF ANY MOVIE IN BOTH THE USA(257 million dollars(in the USA) AND WORLDWIDE(630 million dollars), AND IT’S MAKING MORE AND MORE AND WILL HIT THE BILLION DOLLAR MARK ANY TIME IT GETS! HOORAY FOR DISNEY!

      Reply

  201. I think Pacific Rim: Uprising can be called a flop now, guys. It only made $286 Million worldwide so far, and it apparently needed at least $350 Million to break even. it’s pretty much dead in its biggest markets (USA and China), and it’s opened in most of its territories by now (according to IMDB’s release schedule).

    Heck, Universal just recently announced the dates for the Digital HD and Blu-Ray releases, so it’s probably gonna be leaving theaters really soon.

    Reply

  205. It’s a shame that Sgt. Stubby: An American Hero will end up on this list. It’s an adorable animated movie based on the true story of a dog who became a sergeant in WWI. It’s made only $1.3 million with a $25 million budget. Despite receiving a wide release (about 1,600 theaters), I never once saw an ad for it on TV.

    Reply

        • I saw Isle of Dogs the day after I saw Sgt. Stubby and I loved both of them but I liked Isle of Dogs more. I’d recommend both of them. Sgt. Stubby is about a dog that actually became a sergeant in World War I.

      • At this point, you might as well wait for it to show up in Redbox or Netflix. It’s a nice little animated movie about a dog that actually became a sergeant in World War I.

        Reply

    • Sgt. Stubby is a wonderful movie. It deserved better than the low box office numbers it has received.

      Reply

    • And now I have NO idea when it’s even going to get a HOME MEDIA release. Most of the films that came out in Spring(“Rampage”, “Tomb Raider”, “Pacific Rim: Uprising”, “A Wrinkle In Time”, “Sherlock Gnomes”, “Ready Player One”, and a several others) have already come out on home media, and some other films(“Avengers: Infinity War”) are going to be released on home media VERY(and I mean VERY) soon. Even “Spark” got a home media release(a VERY hard to find home media release at that. Universal’s home media division was COMPLETELY focusing on “The Fate Of The Furious” at the time, and just like how Open Road dumped the film into a limited(365 theaters and never expanding) release, Universal just dumped the film’s home media release onto several markets(I guess) to a several store markets(I only recall SEEING the film on Blu-Ray at a local Wal-Mart at one point, and the DVD at a used book store)with no fanfare or promotion. “Sgt. Stubby” was LUCKY enough to get a wide release, let alone a THOUSAND theater release. But thanks to the film NOT even getting a home media release, it’s safe to say, the film could enter “Song of the South” and the original, unaltered “Star Wars” trilogy territory. People might not even know the film even EXISTED at this point. Shame.

      Reply

      • The film is FINALLY going to get a home media release. In NOVEMBER!(see https://funacademystudios.com/product/sgt-stubby-bluray/) All of the films it competed with at the box office(“A Quiet Place”, “Rampage”, “Ready Player One”, “Avengers: Infinity War”, the wide release of “Isle Of Dogs”(which is funny, since both films were animated and were ABOUT dogs) and several others) have been released on home media for almost a while(a several months). And from what I can tell, it’s ONLY going to be released on the distributor’s(Fun Academy’s) website. Even “Spark”, despite getting(from what I could tell) a limited home media release, it still got released in stores, and was released on home media for a good three month theater to home media window(July, to be exact), despite the film ending it’s theatrical run MONTHS beforehand. This film, on the other hand? It will be released on home media 7 MONTHS after it’s theatrical release, and by then, everyone(even those who ACTUALLY saw it during it’s theatrical run) will forget about it. For shame, film, for shame.

        Reply

  206. I’m not surprised that A Wrinkle in Time is on this list. So far, as of April 15, I’m not entirely sure if Red Sparrow will be qualify on the list just yet.

    Reply

    • According to the owner of the studio that released it, it’ll be profitable. Others are skeptical though, so who knows.

      Reply

  210. And, wow, “The New Mutants” is really in trouble. With that film be delayed TWICE, I can see that FOX will just put the film on Disney’s new streaming service(if they get acquired), and never give the film a theatrical release. I’m really getting “Fan4stic” vibes from this.

    Reply

  212. Wow that painful launch of Pacific rim 2 of $10m with a projected $25m on Friday and gnomes is even worse of a $3m on Friday

    Reply

    • No pain from Pacific Rim Uprising as it was made with an eye on the foreign market, where it has already grossed over $122m. The $28m it grossed domestically was above the modest expectations of the studio so they’re content.

      Reply

        • It’s on the pending list, which means that it will be on the regular list at some point. And wow, did that film look awful(and yes, I have never seen “Gnomeo and Juliet”).

        • Even the trailer and movie poster for “Sherlock Gnomes” looked bad…it’s a miracle that MGM hasn’t gone the way of RKO!

      • That’s right. It’s VERY clear that “Pacific Rim: Uprising” was made for the Asian market(especially China)in mind. The domestic(USA) opening weekend results(28 million) are weak, but that was more than what most sources expected(20-25 million). By the way, I saw that film when it came out on it’s opening weekend. It’s nothing spectacular, but it is silly fun.

        Reply

    • Red Sparrow has a shot at the list, Gringo is an Amazon film so its box office wont matter much to them in the long run and Samson cost next to nothing to make

      Reply

    • Red Sparrow looks poised to be on the list. It’s foreign box office, which is at 76 million now, isn’t enough to make up the difference for a lower domestic total.

      Reply

  215. Let mourned the loss that was another quickie about the Entebbe raid called “7 Days in Entebbe”. Made $1.3 million the first weekend!!!

    Reply

  216. Well that’s two unwelcome, repetitive, and inaccurate posts you’ve composed today. After being told to halt such activities. How many more are you planning? Seriously, is this going to last until 2019? 2020? You need to build a bridge and get over it. You’ve been at it for six months now and the result isn’t going to change.

    12 Strong made a profit and is not on the list. Nor is it on any other industry recognized, reputable flop/bomb list. Despite your continuous pleas and protests, all of which were rebuked, denied, and disproven. Deal with it on your own time, away from this board.

    Reply

  217. Sigh, as predicted JMovie lover’s innocent joke baited the crazy back out. Joy.

    Seriously, we don’t need to experience daily manifestations of your residual bitterness and anger over 12 Strong not bombing, as you predicted last November, thus making it ineligible for the list. And your, resulting, inappropriate antics in trying to cope with that realization.

    I have an idea… since this all is, somehow, tied to your personal well-being, why don’t you just create your own website and put it on? This website isn’t going to reverse their decision, despite your numerous inquiries, and ruin their credibility. Problem solved and you can get back on the road of positive mental health. We don’t need 20+ posts of this nonsense.

    Reply

    • If it manages to make it in the black, much like Resident Evil The Final Chapter, it has the overseas box office to thank. Its total overseas has already crossed the $100M mark.

      Reply

    • Seems to be doing well and will clean house internationally. The Assassin’s Creed movie made a lot of money based on foreign grosses and this was better received.

      Reply

    • Tomb Raider has already made $102 million internationally according to Box Office Mojo, with more to be tallied. That will go a long way to making the film profitable.

      Reply

      • And Sherlock Gnomes(which MGM co-produced with Paramount(who had an abysmal 2016 and 2017, but will have a chance this year thanks to “A Quiet Place” and “Mission: Impossible Fallout”), and their first animated film(of any kind) since “Igor”, which came out a decade ago(2008), and ended up on that year’s list) is doing terrible at the box office. “Gnomeo and Juliet” was a film that while it was successful for what it was(almost 200 million dollars worldwide on a modest 30 million dollar budget), but it has since been forgotten, and the seven year gap between that film and this(and Touchstone Pictures, who released the first film, passed on that film(possibly due to “Strange Magic” being a huge flop at the box office) and gave Paramount and MGM(for some reason) the rights.) Yeah.

        Reply

    • Well not really. It is actually people telling a determined individual writing under three names (movieticker, Dylan W, Clockwork) to please disengage in a series of toxic, unwanted propaganda pieces claiming that 12 Strong is a flop when five industry articles (all linked and referenced) confirm that it is not and outlined its profitability, financials and industry references included. And then insisting that the industry articles are a lie and that they know better than all of them, choosing their own reality. Behavior they have continued since last November.

      The website, itself, has determined it is not a flop (based on said articles) and asked them to stop. Hence its absence from the list and removal of their posts. There’s really nothing more to discuss and it’s probably better to not open that can of worms again, as the individual will just start again a series of posts that are equally incorrect and anti-fan spam.

      One has to wonder, of all movies… why such a caustic, irrational response over 12 Strong? It’s probably a bet or something. Or something more deeply rooted than the film itself. Like a disgruntled ex-employee or something. And why it is tied to their anxiety of Den of Thieves (which does still have a shot at making the list) if the VOD/streaming/cable deals don’t overindex? They are completely unrelated.

      Reply

      • This Den Of Thieves obsession to support 12 Strong is not needed. Den Of Thieves made a profit now and is not a flop. You have been told this repeatedly by numerous individuals. Articles and exact quotes are listed on this website for reference of why Den Of Thieves made a profit, all of which you ignore for months in favor of this same disproven statement. It is time to move on to other movies.

        Reply

        • This comment was also removed/hidden/”awaiting moderation” immediately after its creation. Writing it a second time is not necessary nor is it welcome here. There is a reason why your posts and account(s) keep having administrative action taken against it. Respect their wishes not to continue, which it’s obvious that they don’t want you to. This is not the place for such habitual behavior.

    • Of course the one person, Alex, who caused all the drama posted a response to JMovie Lover to continue the drama. Typical.

      It’s not so much a debate but one person, Alex, convinced 12 Strong didn’t flop with paragraphs of nonsense and disproven data When multiple people corrected him, he responds with insults, just like he did to JMovie Lover. The real “debate” is individuals, some of which he continually names, told him directly that 12 Strong didn’t turn a profit yet, likely won’t with all revenue considered, and may be on flop lists. We won’t know for sure until all data is in and we can see how much in the red the production is. That was the assessment determined with all data, and Alex is unable to handle it, somehow convinced individuals forced the movie to not return a profit, which doesn’t happen. He’s been on a campaign of misinformation for months to try to change that determination unsuccessfully and responds to every 12 Strong mention, even when asked to stop.

      Reply

      • You wrote this, exact, post and it was removed, hidden, and deleted. Writing it a second time doesn’t make it any less absurd or welcome here. There’s a reason why all of your comments are getting locked/”awaiting moderation”/removed from view. They are not appropriate and you’ve been told to cease.

        Reply

  220. Your latest rant is absolutely unwanted and absurd. I have no problems with Bob Knee, nor did he mention such. It was completely manufactured by you in trying to continue the unwanted, insufferable communication you insist on continuing on this board. I responded to you when you said that what I wrote is incorrect. I, as you asked, provided the location of the sources.

    Your writing continuously as Dylan W, Clockwork, and movieticker (as confirmed by Disqus) has caused you to officially lose the plot and spiral out of control to complete lunacy. I also think it is rich that the person who boldly claimed “if you don’t like what I write, block me” is trying to play victim (again). There’s a reason why all your posts are being ignored here, it’s time for you to go. Your posts and contributions aren’t needed or welcome. Hopefully, that was the last post you feel the need to write here as this is not this board’s intention. Take the drama somewhere else, here we discuss movies not have meltdowns and personal issues with people. It’s now become bizarre, compulsive, and disturbing.

    Reply

    • This is not productive, not requested, not on topic, and I am requesting that you stop responding to my posts again. You have stated your opinion and it is enough. No one has gotten personal but you, and it happens in every message you write. There are other avenues for you to seek the attention that you continually crave in your posts, please pursue those avenues instead of responding to me.

      Dylan W told you he is not me. Nor is Clockwork myself. This is something you insist and only you. Disqus does not tell you the results of any inquiry nor is anyone aware of any inquiry being made. It is another manufactured statement that was disproven. It is now a crutch for you to continue to post responses that are not requested. Your desire to attack Bob Knee through my post to him and only him after he clearly ignored you is enough to show your problem with him. You hijacked a discussion when it was not invited to achieve that goal. You have a similar problem with Dylan W and Clockwork, and thus you made up this Disqus claim and hijack more posts. You initiate the drama, you respond to others when others ignore you. You need to take the hint, people are ignoring you for a reason. This just cements that you should pursue other avenues.

      Reply

      • Again, none of what you wrote is remotely concerned with movies or their box office results. The intention of this board. It’s just another attempt to justify why your toxic, unnecessary behavior should continue. Save it. Better yet, just delete your accounts. Yes, accounts, plural. No one wants to read another 20 plus posts of this nonsense. Nor do we need to experience daily multi-paragraph juvenile rants from someone who has become unhinged to the point of disturbing, bizarre, irrational, compulsive behavior. The most peculiar of which is to respond directly to people in a hostile, abrasive, and derogatory manner continuously, as you just did, and then complain when they have the audacity to expose the behavior and ask for it to cease.

        As I wrote before, it’s time for you to leave as you have no intention of acting in accordance with the mission statement of this community. Despite being given every opportunity to appropriately and positively contribute.

        Reply

        • Your last post is what multiple people have told you to stop doing. It is your daily posting activity. Thank you for finally admitting your own posting style and disruptive way of posting. That is all anyone has asked for you to recognize and it took this long for you to admit it. It is refreshing to see you admit to your own motives that was evident to everyone.

          In terms of posting standards, I would suggest that you start with yourself. Again, stop responding to me. Fix your own posting behavior before making suggestions to others. I anticipate a complete change of behavior from you if you choose to continue. But as it stands, this posting activity of your is not needed, or requested by me or others. It is now up to you to change as you are aware of it.

        • You wrote all of this before and it was moderated/hidden/removed for a reason. Not only is it completely untrue but now a documented pattern of meritless harassment. This is not the intention of this board and a clear violation of posting privileges. Hence the action on your account and connected names. Your anxiety is a self-inflicted condition of which you can alleviate by changing (and immediately ceasing) your unwelcome, toxic posting behavior. Yet, for some reason you refuse to. Again, this board is for discussion of movies/the box office results of movies… not having perpetual meltdowns and personal issues.

          You stated, in retaining your posting privileges here, that you would immediately cease this behavior and stop all communication in this matter with myself (and others) on all your confirmed names, including but not limited to, Dylan W, clockwork, and movieticker as well as any you intend on creating in the future for, said, purpose. I would suggest you start, or as with the other posts you composed… they will be removed, too.

        • Nothing was hidden or removed. It was a long post three hours ago, so I reposted it shorter to meet Disqus’ requirements for an automatic post. Everything is posted as intended and everything subsequently written has been automatically posted without delay. But keep trying to convince yourself otherwise. This is the pattern of behavior that you keep doing, claiming an alternate reality that isn’t present.

        • Extrapolating on your dissatisfaction over moderation decisions on your posts is also not welcome here. If you have a problem with their censoring and decisions, you need to bring it to their attention. This is not the place for it.

        • This is just spam now. Disqus does not allow this. Move on. This has been disproven, along with all your other claims.

        • Writing the same thing in a third consecutive post is also not needed. You’ve been given ample opportunity to explain yourself, and it didn’t go your way. No one, other than the one who initiated it, can address moderation actions or override it. The actions are visible by everyone here who contributed on the thread, so it’s useless to deny it. It’s now up to you to comply with the rules of this board and remain within acceptable behavior. Or else, it will occur again. The choice is yours.

        • As Clockwork told you previously, this does not make sense. Nothing you said here is coherent. So at least you can claim consistency. At this point, you are just writing. It is spam, which is writing without a point.

        • Fourth time in a row… and it still is not necessary nor welcome. Again, this board is for movies and box office results of movies. Not for you to have personal issues with people. One time was too many, now it’s become bizarre, irrational, disturbing, and compulsive.

  221. Black Panther appears to be making all the other movies flop currently. Avengers: Infinity War looks to be another monster, swallowing up all the other competing movies in the process. Currently, despite the downfall of A Wrinkle in Time, Disney seems to have practically cornered the theatrical market for new movies released in 2018. They have a monopoly. Streaming is the way to go these days. Another threat to the movies is the blockchain. Bitchute, Dtube, Viuly, Flixxo, and other decentralized video services are ready to disrupt the market as well.

    Reply

    • That is a major issue. Disney has cornered the market in a way that it is very hard movies to break through and find a path. The days of 100 million plus production outside of Disney are likely coming to an end as there are only so much box office revenue to go around.

      Reply

      • I wouldnt say completely. WB and the other studios will still make $100 million plus films for thier biggest series such as Fantastic Beasts, DC, Jurassic Park, Mission Impossible and so forth but for others I do agree they need to be considerate in order to have any chance at profits.

        Reply

        • I agree completely. As long as studios continue to have recognizable franchises, accessible to the general audience, they will remain profitable. The bigger issue is maintaining reasonable budgets to allow for a profit. I do think that Netflix, and other streaming outlets, will continue to cater and expand into dominance in the independent film market.

        • Very considerate. Tentpoles and big IP franchises can likely still have a chance at a profit, but smaller movies have to be cautious.

        • Agreed. Baby Driver, for example, was made at a decent $35 million when it would have cost double that in the early 2000s. What I meant however was that the other studios should not really spend$100 million or more on films that dont have that much of a chance to succeed. King Arthur did not need to be $175 million nor did Geostorm. Either keep the budget reasonable or dont make it at all

    • Now the studio is already got back 100M+ considering 55% domestic, 33-40% EU, 25% China share. It is profitable indeed if you know more about movie revenue breakdown. Marketing cost will be covered by international distribution sales. Literally no one in box office pro classify TR is a bomb.

      Reply

    • I think the Amazon Studios stuff even when it doesn’t do well doesn’t belong here. It’s mostly fodder for their streaming service except unlike Netflix they get small to medium theatrical runs.

      Reply

      • With Amazon and Netflix, streaming revenue is definitely the primary goal. Amazon can make up the discrepancy, but they $3.8 million domestic box office is a very light haul.

        Reply

        • I don’t think Amazon are putting out things like Wonder Wheel, Gringo, The Neon Demon, etc… thinking they’re even going to pull $10m worldwide. I think it’s just to remove the “straight to video” stigma from their products. Now that Netflix picked up some Oscar nominations for direct-to-streaming Mudbound, I imagine Amazon changes this practice to just movies with serious box office or awards potential.

  224. It seems like Disney is WILDLY under reporting the budget of A Wrinkle in Time at $100m to keep the humiliating disaster off lists such as this one.

    Reply

    • So much for being on the cover of Time Magazine.

      And even if that $100m number was accurate, they’d still need around $400m world-wide to even begin talking about this approaching break even. Wow.

      Wonder what the real number for both production and marketing will turn out to be? Or if we’ll ever find out?

      Reply

      • A movie that drenched in politics that falls on its face? From Disney? Brought to you by ultra-narcissists Oprah and Ava DuVernay? Definitely unlikely. I’d be shocked if it hit $150m worldwide. It looks a bit short of another John Carter.

        Found the article, LOL!: http://time.com/wrinkle-in-time/

        Reply

        • I couldn’t finish that article. It was disgusting, horrifying, mindless and exactly the kind of information that makes me vomit. Using Jay-Z as a philosopher instead of Euripides? Yes, I’m certain Mr Beyonce’s tripe will last 2000 years.

  225. Get ready for “The Hurricane Heist”! It’s prepped to open with only $7 million against its budget of $40 million.

    Reply

      • Exactly, Jared. Dylan W, this was written to you three times already but 12 Strong is not a bomb nor will make the list. As confirmed by the trades, 12 Strong has already made a profit for WB. It’s becoming bad agenda spam now. Sorry to disappoint.

        As I wrote last time: It overperformed studio expectations OW, and with its financial arrangement it’s $30M budget is backstopped from Alcon and WB is only on the hook for P&A. It’s WW total is double its budget and it has yet to enter territories, such as China.

        Proud Mary, Den of Thieves (despite being considered for a sequel), Red Sparrow, and 15:17 to Paris are the possibilities to make it onto the list so far.

        Reply

        • 15:17 to Paris is kind of surprising. Eastwood usually works with very low budgets and there’s not a lot of A list stars or effects. At 50 million worldwide and that it will probably have a decent life on video/cable I’d be shocked if it wasn’t slightly profitable. I can’t imagine it having a huge ad spend, I didn’t hear about it until it was out.

          Proud Mary is probably the only sure thing on that list. Den of Thieves seems successful and is still playing. Red Sparrow could be if it has no legs. Actually I might bank on that one being a bomb.

        • Actually, Den of Thieves made profit. Annihilation is another one to look out for as its legs aren’t looking that great for a movie that opened pretty low during its opening weekend. Red Sparrow could make it on this list as well.

        • Den Of Thieves made a profit and a sequel is in the works. It is not a bomb at all. It was profitable for STX and how it was profitable was reported in the announcement of the sequel. Proud Mary did not do well in the US, but with a lower budget, it likely will walk away with a close to break even and probably won’t be considered. Same with 15:17 to Paris, the lower budget will be able to break close to even. 12 Strong overperformed slightly in the US, but not enough to offset the lower international totals and the outrageous P&A spend the movie had. It also expanded to IMAX theaters which added to theater costs. It is in flop contention.

          12 Strong, Annihilation, and Red Sparrow are all contenders. Proud Mary and 15:17 are close. Den Of Thieves is profitable right now. Not on the list. The Commuter was also profitable, not on the list.

        • STX is hoping that VOD/streaming/cable (ditto the Commuter) will bring Den of Thieves into profitability but it as of yet is not. The Commuter was saved by the overseas box office like most Liam Neeson vehicles. Hence, Den of Thieves should be considered on the list as a contender.

          15:17 to Paris budget ($35M) is larger than 12 Strong ($30M) and did not have the financial arrangement of the latter outlined above. WB was not on the hook for the IMAX theater cost (as it was contractually pre-arranged by Alcon before being acquired by WB) and there was no such outrageous P&A spend, at a reported $8M. They targeted select conservative outlets for the movie, similar to other Patriotic films. Not included is 12 Strong’s healthy video/cable deals which further bring it into the black. If 15:17 to Paris can attain the same, it will be sparred from the list. As stated by others 12 Strong is profitable for WB and not on the list. Nor will it make an appearance.

          The contenders remain Den of Thieves, Red Sparrow, Annihilation, Proud Mary, and 15:17 to Paris.

        • 2 people have explained why 12 Strong should be on the list. 3 people have explained why Den Of Thieves is not a bomb. STX and other sources have also. It is widely reported. Copy and pasting the same arguments will not change that. There is nothing left to say. Den Of Thieves will not be on the list. 12 Strong has a chance. And as Jared said, 15:17 will not make the list either.

        • Multiple people, four to be exact, have composed to you (in this thread and in the 2017 thread) why 12 Strong is not a bomb, how it has been confirmed to be profitable by now for WB, and why the correct determination was made not to be considered for the list. They even broke down an industry article which states how 12 Strong is a huge success for WB and will lead to other similar themed projects in development.

          12 Strong will not be on the list no matter how many times you inquire, and under what name you use (movieticker or Dylan W, which coincidentally are the only two names that keep spamming that 12 Strong should be falsely included on the list despite repeatedly being told why it is not). This board is not intended for anti-fan spam or agenda and hopefully now you can move on from it.

        • I can confirm that I am not movieticker and I was unaware of the industry article concerning 12 Strong’s profitability. I also have no ill will for 12 Strong. In fact, I haven’t even seen it yet so I don’t have an opinion on it either way.

        • At this point, you need to move on. Writing a regurgitation of the same incorrect points or a defense as to why you should be allowed to trainwreck the discussion needlessly, a week later after the discussion ended, is not productive nor the intention of this board. 12 Strong is profitable for WB and its rejection from consideration on the list thoroughly broken down and explained to you (on both your confirmed by Disqus connected identities). Since you claim to not be engaging in agenda posting, then this should be the last we read regarding 12 Strong on your two names, Dylan W and movieticker. However, I have a feeling it won’t which will just prove the point further.

        • In regards to 12 Strong, that is because there is not any article printed and available stating that 12 Strong was profitable. The speculation of profitability is the best case scenario for WB, but that does not mean that it actually happened or was verified.

        • Well, I guess you should be congratulated in having the self-control to not respond to yourself in three days. As was told to you previously, 12 Strong’s profitability was confirmed in five separate industry articles: THR and Variety articles with the financials outlined and explained, mentioned in regards to 15:17 to Paris’ OW box office and WB’s hopes that it emulates a similar path to profitability/success as 12 Strong, spotlighted and described in detail by Forbes, and confirmed again when industry sources wrote about 12 Strong’s lucrative steaming/cable deals (following similar Patriotic themed movies). All which have been confirmed. At this point, it’s just you ignoring everyone else, refusing to accept the industry confirmed and fact checked factual evidence (despite being directed to it by numerous people and having it explained to you repeatedly), and providing your own reality/version of events. And, henceforth, only you who seem to have such a problem accepting the reality of the situation. Part of me does wonder what is the cause of your delusional determination, but it probably isn’t worth it.

        • Den of Thieves is profitable now. STX isn’t on the hook for anything, it was all by an independent financier (Diamond Films). The international rights were sold off, which helped pay off a majority of the budget, and the ad campaign was fairly inexpensive, not to mention that films like this over-index on the home entertainment side.

        • Agreed and all of this can be verified in the following links.

          Deadline – http://deadline.com/2018/02/den-of-thieves-2-sequel-gerard-butler-50-cent-oshea-jackson-1202287504/
          Tracking Board – http://www.tracking-board.com/den-of-thieves-gets-sequel-with-gerard-butler-director-christian-gudegast-returning/
          Variety – http://variety.com/2018/film/news/den-of-thieves-sequel-gerard-butler-1202697696/
          The Hollywood Reporter – https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/den-thieves-2-gerard-butler-return-1084385

        • I think Annihiliation’s Netflix sell-off internationally will push it into profitability.

        • The numbers for Netflix’s sell-off internationally has shifted from $20 million to $30 million. Is there a reliable number that we can use as a benchmark? In terms of domestic box office, it’s sitting at roughly $28 million with a $40 million production budget. With domestic P&A spend, that adds to the cost. And it’s unclear whether Netflix or Paramount handles international P&A spend. That would be crucial to know in terms of its profit potential.

        • Den of Thieves has made more than 12 Strong while having a similar budget, so what are you even saying?

        • Similar budget range, but nowhere near the same financial arrangement. Also, Den of Thieves had a much bigger P&A spend than 12 Strong. Which is why one is profitable now (12 Strong) for a studio and the other hopes to be when VOD/cable/streaming deals are finalized (Den of Thieves). The Diamond Films point was previously discussed, and debunked, in the 2017 thread which is why it was ignored here the second time around. I do find it suspect that a week later, three names entered a dormant discussion and decided to compose at the same time inaccurate, propaganda statements with identical tone and word choice. Despite there being absolutely no reason to do so and not bringing anything new, or really relevant, to the discussion. This website does a good job in explaining when a movie breaks even, and the contributing factors of such a determination, take a look at it to alleviate your confusion.

        • Where have you found the P&A spends for each? Considering how WB is known for blowing a lot on P&A, I’d be very surprised if Den of Thieves spent more. In fact, one of the few articles I’ve found mentions that WB spent a lot more than STX on P&A for a similar opening. Granted, it didn’t give specifics, but I generally trust Deadline.

        • Deadline doesn’t state P&A figures but instead focuses on producer or studio spin, as you noted. Succeeding industry articles mentioned STX’s true spend with their head stepping down and their hope for it to be profitable in the future. As well as mentioning it again in more detail during Death Wish’s OW. WB curbed P&A spending for 12 Strong to focus on the similarly themed 15:17 to Paris, which they had more to gain from. WB never saw it as their film but a low risk acquisition. As for where both are stated explicitly, it can be seen in the quarterly profiles of every studio of which are reprinted in the aforementioned later articles, among others.

        • To help clarify, in regards to P&A spend, Den Of Thieves did not have a larger P&A spend than 12 Strong. In fact, the opposite was the case as 12 Strong had a much larger spend launch along with IMAX screenings. WB’s track record of larger P&A spends is absolutely the case and 12 Strong was placed as a January launch to accommodate a larger P&A. This again was printed in Deadline and the statement can be referenced. There’s no reason to not trust Deadline or think a bigger agenda is at play.

          These tangent arguments presented seem to support 12 Strong when there is no record of any of the claims Alex has made. 12 Strong P&A spend was never stated as being impacted by 15:17 To Paris and the low risk acquisition claim was not substantiated actual numbers printed by a trade. And the other arguments made subsequently by Alex have been similarly debunked or unsubstantiated. The STX executive was in motion to leave in November 2017 before Den Of Thieves was released in January 2018 and was not related. The financials for Den Of Thieves proving profitability has never been modified or withdrawn. In fact, it has been recorded and easily accessible in numerous trades with further financials proving its validity.

        • You, literally, wrote this numerous times already to multiple people. Composing the same propaganda posts, yet again, doesn’t make it any less erroneous or unwarranted. Countless people have provided receipts and referenced articles in response to and in alleviating your inaccuracies and confusion. Especially since you aren’t providing any new insight or even factual counterpoints. 12 Strong is profitable and not going to make the list. Den of Thieves hopes to bring its totals into the black by steaming/cable/VOD deals… but until that happens, it’s a possibility to the list. I’m not sure why this causes you such anxiety, but it’s becoming concerning now as its beyond normal rationality. Every one else has accepted this, basic, concept and been able to move on. It seems that you are confused by this website and its purpose but it is not for anti-fan rants. And no one wants to read two to three days later another round of the same nonsense, composed by a series of easily connected names, confirmed to originate from the same individual.

        • Den Of Thieves made a profit. I’m not sure why you can’t accept this but its been stated numerous times with facts, figures, and sources from reputable trades. Future numbers do not have to be included. It is profitable now and an inability to accept the actual financials doesn’t negate or refute written and documented statements proving otherwise.

          With 12 Strong, it has not been recorded anywhere where 12 Strong has made a profit with actual financials. Others have said they can’t follow your argument as it is not recorded financially. Your own statement had a future trajectory in China’s box office helping out 12 Strong to help push it into a profit. That is the difference, and this
          has been explained multiple times to you by multiple people. Den Of Thieves is profitable, 12 Strong may or may not be when actual financials are examined. We simply don’t know with the financials given. For some reason, you refuse to look at the financials and this is also in your analysis of 15:17 To Paris, The Commuter, Death Wish among others. When multiple people have arrived at the same conclusion, you add unsubstantiated claims that we are all connected or have attachments to movies. These continued insults to everyone who respond to you are not needed and ruins your argument further.

        • I’ll bottom line it for you. We don’t need you composing under two names in continuing wholly inaccurate, repetitive, propaganda fueled discussions and reigniting long dormant conversations. Nor, do we need you creating new names, intending solely to agree with you/continue said discussion, when everyone else wise enough to see the obvious connection ignores you and your contributions to this board. You’ve been at this since November of last year. I get it, you are angry at being wrong. But it’s time to let it go. No one cares to see this continue until November of this year and beyond. Everything you just composed was stated before, explained how it is incorrect and provided actual article references, and asked to stop. Today alone, you were provided five industry articles in rebuttal of your inaccurate stance which you refuse to look at/think you know better. Most people would apologize for trainwrecking the discussion and move on. However, you can’t seem to and you continue to engage in the same foolery you compose every couple days. Rinse. Repeat. It’s not everyone else, it’s you. And it’s not needed or welcome here.

        • It’s very revealing that this is how you respond. All insults, no argument presented, and completely inaccurate in the entire statement.

          However, the last line is the most telling. I do not recall you being the owner or moderator of this board. Telling members that they are not welcome here or needed is way out of bounds. It goes beyond insults, and beyond reasonable discourse. If you don’t want to read, there is a block button for that function. I have been very civil to you, and stuck to the facts. It’s a shame you did not.

        • As composed to you today, here are the articles: “THR and Variety articles with the financials outlined and explained, mentioned in regards to 15:17 to Paris’ OW box office and WB’s hopes that it emulates a similar path to profitability/success as 12 Strong, spotlighted and described in detail by Forbes, and confirmed again when industry sources wrote about 12 Strong’s lucrative steaming/cable deals (following similar Patriotic themed movies).” Review them at your leisure and, henceforth, there should be no further need for you to continue this or any other later identical discussions. Continuing to justify why you should be allowed to create multiple names and continue unwanted, toxic communications on this board is just as bad as the act itself. As I wrote before, you’ve been given six months to state your case. It’s not happening as you want, nor is it going to. Instead of regurgitating unwelcome responses, deal with it offline.

        • There is not a link to any of this, as was stated last time when you mentioned this. A google search does not pull up any specifics in terms of financials. You provided this as “proof” previously and others have refuted it. As others stated, it’s the hope that it could be profitable and how it could make a profit. You even added your own future measurement of China’s box office to support this which could not be verified. It never tied into 15:17 To Paris. That was a link you seemed to make and was also refuted. The claim made that I was “shown five new articles today” is incorrect. This is not five new articles. It is not new. It was not brought up to me by anyone but you at this moment. It is not even one new one today. All have been refuted previously. This is nothing new to add here or a new revelation, as it has been expressed by others previously. Again, your case is confusing and doesn’t follow financials. That is the one issue the whole time in your correspondence with numerous people. And then the insults, which are still prevalent.

        • Your last response, to address your confusion, is the epitome of what should not happen here and is not necessary. Curt dismissal of anyone willing to discuss with factual evidence and creating your own reality because it differs from what you want it to be. Only you seem to have this lingering problem. There is no “new” information because those are the true financials of 12 Strong. Which is the criteria used by every film, not just 12 Strong, in determining its success. They aren’t going to change and they were told to you by multiple here in confirming why it is profitable and not on the list. Variety, for example, is going to write yet another article stating the same thing because you don’t want to believe it to be true. At that time, you should have ceased this nonsense. However, since you can’t, there’s nothing else to provide other than to remind you again of the criteria the film industry uses in classifying a bomb and at what point a movie makes money for a studio. Using, said, industry articles to support the appropriate determination. Furthermore, you can’t feign being the victim when you are logging onto this board with the sole purpose of creating a disruption under multiple names. And, since you suggested the block option, others on this board have tried to no use. As you write under multiple names. Nor should they have to in avoiding your continuous, unwanted style of posting. The only option then is for people with the intention of contributing to leave or feel uncomfortable in posting, which also should not happen. As you don’t have the right to impact other’s enjoyment of this board nor state boldly if you don’t like my insufferable rants and stifling posting, block me.

        • In conclusion, there are no financials that you can provide with actual references in regards to 12 Strong. That’s the point that others have told you and why it’s hard to follow your argument. It’s OK to state that the information isn’t provided as in the case of 12 Strong it isn’t, at least not publicly. It’s easier to say that than insults when asked for proof.

        • No, in conclusion: Five articles were provided to you, when prompted. All which contain the financials of 12 Strong and, clearly, rebuke your stance. They have been submitted by numerous people to your attention whom all, clearly, understood the counterpoint. You have yet to review them, haven’t discussed them, and have no intention to. Which your latest response clearly demonstrates. Instead, all you have composed is toxic, propaganda pieces that shape the reality into what you want to be true, instead of what actually is. Only you have this complication and roadblock in moving on. It’s ok to admit that you were wrong and 12 Strong is profitable, despite your prediction last November. However, it’s not ok to continue the same rinse and repeat toxic communications on this board under multiple names.

        • As mentioned previously, Alcon paid for the IMAX screenings as part of WB’s acquisition deal of 12 Strong. WB is not on the hook for that cost and is only in for the P&A spending, which has been confirmed by multiple industry articles at $8M. Movies aren’t placed in January to accommodate larger P&A spend. WB selected the date because it was the same as American Sniper and other similarly themed military themed, red state leaning films. The rest of your response is a regurgitated copy and paste of points debunked and proven to be false by five industry articles which support and fully illustrate 12 Strong’s profitability, financials included. Articles which you refuse to read and continue to push on with your agenda. They aren’t untrue as people have gone on record.

          When pressed, you have yet to produce a single shred of evidence to support your claims. All you state is vague comments. When asked for specific links of referenced articles, since no one has been able to locate it, you ignore the request. Which is unsurprising because, like everything else you’ve composed, it’s wholly manufactured, inaccurate agenda posting. There is no record of the profitability of Den of Thieves yet beyond conjecture. You keep claiming it exists, yet have not provided any factual evidence to prove this or support that it received the streaming/VOD/cable deals needed to make it profitable. The only thing you say is it’s being considered for a sequel, but this situation (for example with Star Trek 4) has happened before. Studios announce sequels, hoping to increase interest to bring the film in the black to warrant it. It was a PR ploy, nothing more. If benchmarks are not reached, the sequel is scrapped. As of yet, the benchmarks have not been reached and the project has been placed on the back burner for the studio. Your claim of knowing the timeline of an executive dismissal is the most ludicrous of false claims you’ve made yet. The financials proving profitability of Den of Thieves haven’t been withdrawn, because they don’t exist yet. Nor have you provided evidence that it does.

        • Bob Knee is correct. There is no point in discrediting him as the article is there to reference. All of these 12 Strong claims have been posted by you previously and disproven by multiple people. The facts and figures you claim have never been released publicly or quoted anywhere when fact checked and you have been told that repeatedly. It is now been months and you are still trying to sell the same argument that has been rejected. Copy and pasting them again does not make them any more valid. You have been told by Clockwork and by others that they do not make sense, and yet you continue to go on with these figures. In fact, it’s only you that continues to claim that your facts are right and when asked, provide nothing new to the table but these disproven claims. There’s no point in telling you what others have told you as you refuse to believe anything but facts and figures never released. More importantly, your issue is with Bob Knee, not me. I am not going to solve a problem that you obviously have with him. It is your personal issue.

          As for the Den Of Thieves claims, multiple people,including myself, have given you the exact links, the exact quotes, and the exact financials for it. These are from industry trades that were never amended or forecasted, as you falsely claim in every message. You continue to claim that there is an “agenda” for posting them, we are
          all “connected”, or some other absurd conspiracy theory. In this regard, it is you causing your own confusion in seeing the obvious. Quite frankly, you know the financials, you read them, and your only conclusion is that it is made up or some other absurd theory in denial. It is not our responsibility to fix the roadblock you have caused
          because you do not want to accept what is on screen.

  227. Keep your eye on Red Sparrow. With a $69 million budget, it lis looking to just open with $16-17 million. Granted overseas could allow it to break even but keep a close eye.

    Reply