Discuss Kong: Skull Island
Discuss → Movies → Kong: Skull Island → General
This has flop written all over it.
posted by Cobra2323STAFFMOD on March 6, 2017 at 12:59 PM
Won't break 30 mil opening week.
Reply by wreckage3001 🎃🏠☕🍪
on March 6, 2017 at 1:37 PM
Before its release, Star Wars was considered a box office bomb waiting to happen. The problem? It looked too different from other sci-fi movies of the time. Fox executives didn’t have much faith in George Lucas' space opera, so only booked it into 40 theaters for its Memorial Day weekend opening.
“There’s an enjoyable irony to this,” Robbie Collin of The Telegraph wrote. “In 1977, Fox was convinced that Star Wars was going to be a flop because the damn thing was so unfashionable. In the mid-seventies, American cinema still looked like Taxi Driver and All the President’s Men, and all the available data suggested that audiences preferred their pictures realistic.”
Even Lucas was convinced that Star Wars was going to flop.
**
Before it was released in December 1997, many film reporters were predicting that Titanic was going to sink. It had a disastrous production with numerous delays and a bloated budget of $200 million, the highest of any film at the time. The Los Angeles Times even began running a daily column called “Titanic Watch,” which chronicled every production delay and increasing budget concern for the massive film. When Titanic was pushed from its original summer release date to a December one, many in Hollywood felt that the epic movie could be a colossal flop.
“The likelihood that Titanic, the costliest film ever made, will delay its opening, previously set for the July 4 weekend, is sending ripples across Hollywood and turning the summer season into turmoil,” The New York Times reported.
**
After the success of Titanic, James Cameron took a 12-year break from narrative features to make Avatar, another larger-than-life movie that used state-of-the-art technology. Like Titanic, Avatar had to contend with numerous delays, rewrites, and a ballooning budget. Studio executives and film reporters believed it would flop under its own weight because of its production woes, not to mention its three-hour running time.
**
Reply by Cobra2323
on March 7, 2017 at 10:02 AM
What are you talking about? This is a remake of a remake of a remake. Maybe it won't flop but your response is idiotic.
Reply by SpaceRanger06
on March 7, 2017 at 11:01 AM
@Cobra2323 his response isn't idiotic at all. To be fair you're lucky you got a reply because your original post was click bait without offering any reasons as to why it might flop.
Reply by wokeones
on March 7, 2017 at 11:14 AM
This is one of those movies I'm sure will only be entertaining in the theater, but the subject matter doesn't interest me enough to do all the things it takes to see a movie (babysitters).
Reply by tmdb65271336
on March 7, 2017 at 11:35 AM
The movie cost $190M to produce and is tracking for a $40M opening in the US. The moviegoers who saw Logan will be looking for something new. Monster movies tend to do well internationally. Godzilla did $200M in the US and about $550M in total with a 74% positive rating from critics. Kong is tracking similarly and has hotter stars than Godzilla did (Hiddleston and Larson along with reliable figures like Jackson and Goodman) while Godzilla had Aaron Taylor Johnson and Bryan Cranston.
In short, I can't see how Kong won't do as well as Godzilla. Had it been a critical flop, or the effects dodgy, I'd have been concerned. But by all accounts it should do well and will work as effective counter-programming when Disney's Beauty and the Beast dominates (and I mean DOMINATES) next weekend
Reply by Philippe LeMarchand
on March 7, 2017 at 11:46 AM
Now this place is beginning to feel just like IMDb
.
Reply by HarrySkywalker
on March 7, 2017 at 2:00 PM
Snoozilla 2014 was an awful movie. This one just looks 10000 times better.
Reply by cjn104
on March 7, 2017 at 2:52 PM
If anything, it seems like it could be the Mad Max of modern monster movies
Reply by wokeones
on March 7, 2017 at 3:44 PM
That would be preferrable. I saw Max the 2nd weekend after the hype.
Reply by e3m88
on March 7, 2017 at 4:06 PM
I just want to see giant monster!!!
Reply by Daniel Martinelli
on March 9, 2017 at 11:47 AM
I think LOGAN should keep it at the top of the box office, or even if Skull Island gets the first place, it will not be that high because the character's hugh jackman farewell movie will still snatch a lot of tickets. And then Beauty and the Beast will bury any chance of success that Skull Island can hope for at the box office in the United States.
It will not be a flop, but rather below financial performance. And I'm afraid LEGENDARY might wonder if it's worth launching 'Godzilla versus King Kong'.
Reply by cjn104
on March 9, 2017 at 11:50 AM
Probably will. Could be a slow burner with gaining more money later on or even with DVD sales. I don't think it'll flop, but as you said its potential to perform below than anticipated is a high possibility. On the bright side, there's about as much hype for this as there was for Godzilla, if not more!
Reply by Daniel Martinelli
on March 9, 2017 at 11:59 AM
Perhaps , 'Skull Island' get a boxoffice performance quite similar to 'Pacific Rim' whitch got equal budget . So , from a huge help from China that new Kong film can mantain the chances of ''GvKK" , but the final verdict will come from 'Godzilla , the King of the Monsters' .
Reply by jorgito2001
on March 9, 2017 at 1:39 PM
Opening sandwiched between Logan and Beauty in the Beast won't do it any favors...with Logan still bringing in mucho CASH. Hoping it has a great opening. Would hate for Kong vs Godzilla be dumped if this one flops.
Reply by Daniel Martinelli
on March 9, 2017 at 3:47 PM
Regrettably, this scenario is possible. Putting Skull Island's debut, a 190 million dollars production (((Without considering the marketing cost))) among two other big-name films was a terrible move for the future of the Monsterverse that barely started.