Jackskeleton

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/adventure...s_6072539.html



Really Paramount, it's your own fault. the first didn't make much and was panned, the second surely must have been known to flop. this also goes to Universal. They blame the HULK film of flopping because the work print was leaked around. No. Universal, HULK sucked at the box office for a simple reason.. it wasn't that good. people think Hulk, they think SMASH. the movie didn't have much SMASH in it. you screwed up the moment you picked mr. Artesy "Look at the floor for twenty minutes for deep meaning in a popcorn film" Ang Lee as director. It wasn't the fault of a few who had a work print. the only thing they knew was something everyone else knew for some time now.. that it was going to SUCK! (Don't get me started on that crappy wipes/transitions)

either way.. Studio's... Don't go RIAA on the public or someone else. It's your own fault for this crap.

This finger is also pointing at Charlies Angels.

Studio's It's your own fault. deal with it.

RyoHazuki

I agree. These two movies didnt do well because A. They werent that good. B. They didnt have a very wide audience that wanted to see it. . Not because of video games or the internet or the economy or the war on terror. Most movies have bootleg copies floating around before they open.

Jackskeleton

the three skanks of charlies angles were trying to pit the blame on Demi moore and her actions in the tabloids for the failure of charlies angles 2. oh man, why can't these chicks just accept it. the movie was crap and it's appeal was limited.

wm lopez

And SINBAD was a weak movie too.
But the TOMB RAIDER was a no-brainer that it was going to be a flop. The 1st was hit, but nobody liked it.
The producer should be fired for green lighting this project!
Why do you think that they never made a sequal to GODZILLA?
It was a huge hit , but nobody liked it.

Jepthah

Bravo for your thread, Jack.

Great movies don't always make great money, and the reverse is also true. But these studios really are pathetic in believing that they have a chance in such a crowded summer when they release something sub-par. If you notice what the pictures with 'legs' are this summer (such as Finding Nemo, 28 Days Later, Pirates..., Beckham) the common thing is that they are generally acknowledged as having strong stories and are entertaining. You'd think studios would be more familiar with those basics, but they act as if they aren't important. Instead they're focused on getting star X and release date Y, and the rest can go to hell.

They can only make the audiences jaded to a certain point before they get hip to the game.

LiquidSky

Are you serious? Man, they should thank Demi for bringing in some publicity! I have never been impressed with those three. I really want to see "Kill Bill" but I cannot stand Lucy Liu!

marty888

Studios can come up with excuses for ANYTHING.

"Pluto Nash? We should have known that would fail - I mean. after all, Pluto is the most boring planet in our solar system and has never captured the public's imagination. Now, if we had titled it Jupiter Nash....."

harosa

Wasnt Paramount recently blamed and/or sued by some game company for tarnishing the Star Trek franchise with bad tv shows and movies, thereby draining money from the Trek games?

Troy Stiffler

Tomb Raider was horrible. Everyone thought it was horrible. And yet it made over $100M. That's pretty pathetic. I don't know ONE person who actually liked it.

I laughed when I heard that they second one was definatly coming. And I even thought that it may be good; with Jan DeBont directing, and all. But I'll pass for now. It's one of the few movies that just look really bad from the previews.

Rogue588

guess no one visits the dark underbelly of DVD Talk that is Video Game Talk...

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...hreadid=307939

PixyJunket

Hard to visit it NOW as if you even THINK about clicking a link you are bombarded with Final Destination 2 ads.

Jackskeleton

I blame your thread for the failure of mine.

I guess you can say it's a repost, but I was talking about a more general discussion about studio's making stupid excuses for film flops when it's just all their own fault.

El-Kabong

So here's an odd conundrum - People always bitch and moan about the constant stream of brainless action movies coming out of Hollywood these days. A fair enough assessment.

But then - here's Hulk, which trys to be a chararacter study and/or a reasonably thoughful film instead of a brainless Hollywood action movie. And yet, people still bitch and moan about "Deep meaning in a popcorn film". WTF?

Which just goes to show that you cant please everyone.

devilshalo

I've been secretly wanting to send an email to the heads of my work, detailing that with great power comes great responsibility and spending the kind of money on sequels that they would never spend on the original (while cost cutting by pink slipping employees) is the reason why I'm not in the stock option program. So far 4 films have been put out or distributed to the tune of $400M and only brought in around $310M.

My beef is that studios need to spend less. There's no reason for bloated budgets. Hey, we spent $60M on the first film and it grossed $110M, if we spend $160M on the sequel... look at the possibilities!

Jackskeleton

if the character study was done with the intent of just that, it might have worked. Ang Lee was pushing in to many different directions. if you want the film to be taken seriously, don't try to give it comic book edges. the transitions and wipes were awful. I was waiting for a modulated Matrix Star Wipe. I realize he was trying for a comic book look, but it came off as trying to many things and failing at all of them. People were expecting one thing from the hulk... Smashing and destruction from a character that has a sort of inner demon in him. Ang Lee should have focused on one thing. either go all comic book, go all smash and crash or go all metaphorical (lets look at all the small flowers, cuts, etc. for the full 2 hours and think what is going on with the hulk) Folks went in to see the hulk doing something. they only got that in the last half of the half and the enemy wasn't fully established. flush out other characters and establish a villian. the film flopped and was not a success on the stand point of folks liking it. that's also to be discussed. this thread is simply pointing out that Universal should have realized what mistakes they were making and shouldn't blame some workprint for stealing all their Potential cash.

HoosierPapa

May I respond to Paramount with a big, fat DUHHHH!

Yes, I'm sure the fact that we were force fed yet another retread Tomb Raider game (what was that, number #8?) did not help your cause. But you are the ones that decided to make a sequel to a movie that stunk in the first place.

If they bank on the game fan base they made another error. I mean how many sequels and gold editions can be released before people stop caring? The series lost it's steam after the first one for crissakes.

Own up to your mistakes, you're making too big a salary to be acting like a kid.

Dr. DVD

This pretty much confirms what I said earlier about both TR2 and CA2. Just because a movie was a hit doesn't mean people liked it.
Also, the reason the game bombed was because it SUCKED!!!! I tried renting it and the controls were so bad I couldn't even make a jump on time. Heck, glad I only wasted $6 on a rental as opposed to $40 on a purchase.

What really baffles me is that MAXIM gave the game a five star review. How on earth did that happen? Can their opinions be bought or something?

jasonbird

Quote:

Originally posted by Jackskeleton
if the character study was done with the intent of just that, it might have worked. Ang Lee was pushing in to many different directions. if you want the film to be taken seriously, don't try to give it comic book edges. the transitions and wipes were awful. I was waiting for a modulated Matrix Star Wipe. I realize he was trying for a comic book look, but it came off as trying to many things and failing at all of them. People were expecting one thing from the hulk... Smashing and destruction from a character that has a sort of inner demon in him. Ang Lee should have focused on one thing. either go all comic book, go all smash and crash or go all metaphorical (lets look at all the small flowers, cuts, etc. for the full 2 hours and think what is going on with the hulk) Folks went in to see the hulk doing something. they only got that in the last half of the half and the enemy wasn't fully established. flush out other characters and establish a villian. the film flopped and was not a success on the stand point of folks liking it. that's also to be discussed. this thread is simply pointing out that Universal should have realized what mistakes they were making and shouldn't blame some workprint for stealing all their Potential cash.

In regards to the Hulk, you might feel this way about this movie but there are many others who liked it. Heck it's my favorite of the year. I am so happy it wasn't just a Hulk Smash flick. The Hulk is so much more than that. The Hulk is about repressed emmotions exploding uncontrolably. Ang nailed the Hulk. If you didn't get it, then that's fine. It doesn't mean it's a bad flick. over 60% of critics gave this movie positive reviews. In this forum, it would seem that those that disliked it were more vocal than those that did. This doesn't mean it's a bad movie. There are movies that I disliked that are praised on this forum, but I'm hijacking this thread, so back on topic....

Studios will always make these mistakes, people will be fired
(dispite their excuses as to why their pojects fail) and new
people will come up with more lame excuses. There will always
be successful crappy movies and failing masterpieces. I agree on
both TR 2 and CA 2 (but not Hulk). TR2 might have been more
successful had they changed the format a little. The trailers seem
to be selling the exact same thing from the original. I didn't like
the first, hense I'm not going to see the second. I imagine others
felt the same or similar.

Jason

Jackskeleton

Groucho would have loved this one


Yes, the merits of HULK can be discussed, I had issues with the Wipes and dissolves because they are not only untraditional, but on a visual standpoint, they detract from the film. anyhow. that is a seperate issue.. the main issue here is that UNIVERSAL felt that the reason the hulk lacked in box office (with the second week dive) was because of the workprint that was in circulation before the film was released. They do not factor in other items such as.. it's summer.. the next week usually is owned by the next big blockbuster. Or the fact that it was being panned before it was released. Sure the comments about it being a huge flopp with a opening of 60+ is not needed and I defended the hulk on that standpoint, but really, the movie didn't have a big fan base and it's not because we "didn't get it". Crazy people hear voices in their head. does this mean that normal folks just don't "get it" when it comes to crazy? either way.. Film Studio's shouldn't blame outside sources for there own fault. the hulk wasn't a great film they should have realized what the hulk was about and decide on What to do instead of splitting there efforts in many directions.

jasonbird

Off topic: "don't get it = didn't follow or understand the case material/what the director, actors, writers were trying to portray" Sorry if I lost you there. It wasn't an attack by any means as you obviously could not have followed the story very losely (as needed) due to your counting every edit.

To say that someone seeing an early print and not seeing it in
Theaters doesn't affect the box office is . And to say
that people judging a movie by an early work print (mostly on the
internet) doesn't effect a movie is as well. With the
price of tickets as high as they are, every ticket counts. To say
that the Hulk doesn't have a huge fanbase is also nonsence as
the Hulk is known worldwide and has a huge fanbase

Again just because you personally didn't like the Hulk doesn't
make it a bad film. Heck, if they would've cast Leo Decaprio as
Bruce Banner, and went for the teen crowd they would've
brought in the money but it wouldn't have been the Hulk. Yes,
the Hulk would have made more money had the work print not
been shown on the net (illegal by the way). Say that's not true.

Jason

Jackskeleton

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/TheH...19/reviews.php

Critics had mixed feelings about this. but plain and simple. the amount of folks who were detracted from seeing this in theaters because of the workprint doesn't amount to how much they say potential lose was. Those who downloaded the Work print are the same type that weren't going to pay for the movie ticket anyways. You narrow it down and you find that those who have the ability to get ahold of the work print is a select few who know how to get items off the net. You can't just sign on aol and a message pops up saying "You got Hulk work print". You have to work around P2P's and so forth. These are the same folks who wont buy a ticket anyways. so you are really counting potential loses which were never even potentially there. this is like opening up a McDonalds in a area filled with vegans and saying... "Well, there is 100,000 people in this town, so since our burgers are a buck, we should make 100,000 in a matter of days". it just doesn't work that way.

the work print just supported what folks were saying for sometime.. that the hulk looked crappy and the film looked like it was going to flop by personal expectations. There is no proof that the Hulk made Less money because of the workprint, it made what it made. it opened up big and boom, folks realized what crap they were watching.. either that or they just didn't get it.

You are also stating that the fan base is huge.. so why isn't the film still higher on the top 10? Because even though the fan base is huge, it doesn't mean the film was good. and I don't care if tickets are 100.00, not everyone has the means or the knowledge of how to get the work print. Not to mention there are folks, amazing enough, that don't like to watch crappy quality and so forth.

the film isn't doing good in the box office, not because folks could see it in a crappy 17' monitor, but because it wasn't a film that struck to the masses and warrented repeat viewings. folks felt it dragged on. folks wanted more HULK. folks wanted more popcorn and less drama. It's not a matter of some not getting it. It's shown that LOTS of folks didn't get it and THAT is what caused the box office slope for the Hulk, not some stupid work print. Shyte. right now I can find a copy of Pirates, T3 and any other film out there.. but you know what, that isn't stopping them from raking in bigger box office amounts. The story and the film itself has legs and even if there is a crowd online watching and downloading without paying, you still have films that make money. amazing isnt it.

Rypro 525

i also read on imdb that the chicks from charlies angels 2 didn't care that it flopped and they didn't do it for the money

Rogue588

Quote:

Originally posted by Rypro 525
...and they didn't do it for the money

Yeah....they did it all for the Nookie, the Nookie...

Oh sorry...how 1999 of me...

Jackskeleton

yeah, funny how they after it all blame Demi as the reason it wasn't a huge success.

mwj

Well I think you could argue the movie might have done better if the game was done and cross-promotion was possible, but it still would probably not have made money. This is just CYA for who ever greenlighted this picture.