Suggestion: directors that failed to expectation after a sucess movie. Like Richard Kelly with soutland tales, Vincent Gallo with Brown bunny, Michael Cimino with Heavens gate and John Boorman with Zardoz.
That's a solid idea. Richard Kelly comes up quite a bit. I hope the guy gets another chance soon. I think he's got a lot more solid hits left in him and, much like Paul Thomas Anderson, studios should consider giving him a reasonable budget to make interesting movies.
@@SyntopikonSouthland Tales is a beautiful disaster, an acid trip of a movie, but mostly not in a good way. There's a scene in it where two cars have sex. No real context, just an animated car commercial where one car mounts another one. The fact that such a thing made it to the final cut shows how big an ego the director had and how out of control the whole production was.
I think part of that is budgetary constraints. Animation is still notoriously expensive and this was a first-of-its-kind sort of thing. Another minute could've been millions and it had already gone so overbudget.
@@volodymyrbilyk555there was even a cut storyline regarding Aki finding one of the spirits that came from a child I think it was and it would have added some to the story.
To be fair, Cutthroat Island is not a bad movie. That is not to say that it's a great film by any means, but it's not terrible. It's a mediocre adventure film that has its high spots and its low spots and that is fairly enjoyable to watch. Neither Renny nor Geena nor the studio deserved the massive hit they took because of that film.
I think that Harlin and especially Davis didn't deserve it (I think stars rarely deserve the blame for a movie underperforming outside of a truly bad performance - and, happily, both seem to making something of a comeback), but I can't say the same for Carolco only because I think the risk they took was more of a gamble as opposed to a measured risk. I think they saw how well Hook did a few years prior and wanted to replicate its success but were unable to.
@@Syntopikon I have to say, I don't even remember the movie coming out and I was of an age at the time where I would've been the target audience for the film, but it strikes me as the kind of movie that people would've come out to see. Undoubtedly the trailers would've made it look like fun escapism and it features actors, and a director, who were hot at the time. So the main question in my mind is why didn't audiences show up. In regard to Renny, I watched his most recent film The Bricklayer and it was . . . okay. Aaron Eckhart did surprisingly well with the action scenes (especially considering his age and the fact that he's not traditionally known as an action guy) and there was some good action choreography, but it was otherwise a pretty generic straight-to-video kind of film. I also saw his Hercules movie a few years back and it was LAUGHABLY bad. Honestly, I'm not sure what happened to the guy. I go back and watch films like Die Hard 2, The Long Kiss Goodnight (super-underrated BTW) and Cliffhanger, and I think to myself, "Why can't you just do THAT again?" Just do the thing that you've already shown that you can do!
I sorrrrrt of agree... Harlin actually deserves a chunk of the blame. As a director he strikes me as capable, but not particularly remarkable. He's not the sort of director I'd gamble on, and it was his ambition without vision that makes Cutthroat so... Meh. His filmography is full of films that, at best, only seem to have potential. His filmography would be great if it were handled by other directors.
@@RandJohnson If you haven't seen The Long Kiss Goodnight, you should check it out. It's one of the most fun action movies I've ever seen and it was largely ignored upon release.
@@sorenpx I believe I did. Isn't that the amnesiac sleeper assassin movie? I recall there being a pretty amazing car crash scene in the beginning. It's still felt like a regular old Hollywood film to me though. I wouldn't call my cell phone snob but I have a very difficult time enjoying purposeful blockbusters like Michael Bay movies. He's just not the kind of director I care much about. I'd rather see an action film by someone like Alex Garland because there are themes and motifs whereas this guy's films feel sort of artless and more showy. He's just not my guy hahaha
Here is a significant correction regarding film budgets. Using Final Fantasy as the example, the film cost $137 million; this cost does NOT include the marketing budget nor the film studio. $137 million was the film's production cost, with no ancillary costs. If you include the cost of the studio and marketing, The Spirits Within skyrocketed to $212 million. Since theatre chains take about half of a movie's box office as their cut to screen a film, TSW needed to earn approximately $430 million to break even. What this means is Final Fantasy The Spirits Within wasn't just a flop, it was a catastrophe for Square, who lost -$127 million.
I was amazed at the small amount of marketing that was done for this film considering it's budget. Most films today have marketing costs that are generally 50% of the actual budget of the film. Maybe this wasn't the case then, but that figure was the first thing that hit me.
I'm noticing a theme: all of these movies have redeeming qualities and a respectable number of supporters. I imagine that it's because no movie that is truly, obviously terrible is going to receive enough money to sink a studio, as well as the fact that simply pouring more money on can improve certain aspects of a film.
I think that's fairly accurate. Studios are in the business of making money and none of them - outside of passion projects, which usually get small budgets anyways - will fund a movie they think will fail either at the box office or at getting awards (which is why they'll fund, say Paul Thomas Anderson - his movies don't make much money, but are prestigious). And a lot of these movies do find an audience, it's just after the initial release. I think the issues really arises when people are unable to discern whether a particular problem is fixable with money (like a technical issue) or if it's more fundamental than that (a creative issue).
I know you're trying to appeal to new viewers, but I swear to God its like you say the same 3 sentences every other video about certain movies. Like yes we get that Weinstein had bad ideas about how many movies LotR should be you only mention it ONCE PER VIDEO. Same with klaus kinski and all that. Why not just say 3 words about it and then link to a video where you talked about it. I don't wanna constantly be skipping you constantly repeating yourself.
In 1956, both Ray Stark and Martin Jurow were forming Rastar. From 1957 through 2000, the legendary duo have either producing, developing and financing a string of hits and sleepers such as Funny Girl, The Owl and the Pussycat, The Way We Were, Summer Wishes Winter Dreams, Funny Lady, The Sunshine Boys, Smokey & the Bandit 1 and 2, Hot Stuff, The Competition, Annie, The Toy, Blue Thunder, No Small Affair, Sylvester, Nothing in Common, Peggy Sue Got Married, The Secret of My Success, Biloxi Blues, Funny About Love, All I Want for Christmas, L.A. Story, Harriet the Spy, Random Hearts and their final production was The Whole Nine Yards. As of 2001, Rastar has becoming an in-name-only unit of Hallmark Cards since 1986.
I’ve only just picked up today your channel. But can’t stop watching your videos. Everything you do is excellent and so well researched. I think this is one of the best channels on UA-cam … EVER. and I like a lot of this type of videos. I do hope the industry is watching your stuff .. but somehow I feel like you are part of the industry. But I love it!! Well done.
The major problem of The Spirits Within, which anybody who has ever played the games can tell you, is that it is not a Final Fantasy story. If just an iota of all that talent and technology had been put into the adaptation of a true FF story, not only would people remember the storyline, but the film would most likely be remembered today as a major benchmark in cinema history rather than as a film that bankrupted a studio.
The storyline off the top of my head? It was about these entities (spirits) that could kill people if they touched them and the heroine is a doctor trying to work out what they are and thinks they are not dangerous as they are supposed to be when the villain military wants to engineer a military coup so he can wipe the spirits out and basically causes a breach in a city's shield that stops spirits out so that he can march in with troops, kill the spirits, save the day and demonstrates the spirits need to be nuked. Unfortunately, the spirits break in, kill everyone in the city except for the doctor and some troops who fight their way out (inc. the military commanded who did it all) . The doctor finds out that the spirts are basically trying to defend the land and she works out how to calm the spirits down but the military commander, guilty about killing a lot of innocent people, wants to use a honking big space gun to hit the location where the doctor is because it will wipe the spirits out. I can't remember the rest here but the doctor survives and her gang dies and the spirits are calmed. It got real boring for me but I remember all the top off my head. XD
@@NelsonStJames I agree. I remember I watched it when I was a kid and was completely confused because it was nothing like a Final Fantasy. Sometimes tying yourself to a popular brandname can be a weight around your kneck instead of a boost. I think it may have done marginally better, at least in the long run, if it had just been called The Spirits Within. Instead it doomed itself to always kinda be the "non-Final Fantasy Final Fantasy" project and struggles to have its own identity; hence why I think its been mostly forgotten. Sure it was always going to have an uphill battle due to its disastrous performance but the unclear intent caused by the shoehornig in of the FF brand really harmed its prospect of being a cult movie of any significance. Which is a shame because it isnt *that* bad, especially given it was a new method in the industry being employed. Either commit to the FF thing completely doing either fantasy or VII/VIII's tecno-fantasy thing with the familiar elements or just seperate entirely.
Heaven's Gate is 3.5 hours of my life I'll never get back. I loved it when Siskel and Ebert were utterly savage over their criticisms of the film. I think the biggest problem was that Cimino had a hit with The Deer Hunter, then things went to his head. Heaven's Gate was the result. My biggest problem is that people use Heaven's Gate as an excuse to trash The Deer Hunter, which I think is one of the most gut wrenching films I've ever seen.
@koira1 De Niro was looking for him. That wasn't an accident. On the other hand, all three of them at the same POW camp is far fetched, but the movie is so intense, you don't think about that.
Part of me does want to see what that massive rough cut was like. I can only imagine what was going through the producers minds when they saw that *this* is what Cimino really wanted, and they needed to knock off another 2-3 hours.
Cimino played fast and loose just as everyone kinda got fed up with studio directors playing auteur. Same thing happened to Friedkin but he figured the way out and his latter films were some boss shit, while Cimino never just faded away after running on empty for like a decade.
18:15 it was at this moment I realized I fucked up and was confusing The Ninth Gate with Heaven's Gate... and was silently(until now) wondering that there was a film Depp made that bankrupted a studio. I only remember Depp bankrupting himself.
Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning underperforming is one of the most heartbreaking ones for me. Just an amazing movie from start to finish. Deserved to make as much as Barbie and Oppenheimer (not saying they stole its business though or that I don’t like them).
I think the issues were 2 fold: 1. It came out around the time of Barbie & Oppenheimer, but did not benefit at all from the marketing the other two had. Their marketing sucked the wind out of pretty much every other movie. 2. The Part 1 was a mistake, I think. They should've just given it a regular title but put something at the end - like Marvel movies do - that the story will continue in the next installation. Like how Fast and Furious didn't do "Fast X: Part 1" - it was just Fast X. I think if they called it "Mission Impossible 7: Dead Reckoning", it would've done a bit better. But yeah, I really wish the movie the did a lot better. Mission Impossible has been on a roll since Ghost Protocol, doing some of the best action-thriller work of the last 10 years.
That was an absolute shame, since I believe in the long run Dead Reckoning will stand the test of time (at least more than Barbie) . Hype can certainly help a film, but it doesn't necessarily sustain it. Also fallout from covid hurt MI 7; if this had come out in pre covid theaters I believe it would have done far better, and I believe MI 8 is going to more than make up for it. Maybe they will even re-release it for a short time in theaters before the release of part 2 since it will have been quite a wait by that time. Nevertheless nobody involved in the film has anything to be ashamed of; very good pictures will flop at the box-office occasionally for a myriad of reasons. The failure of a movie at the box-office is not synonymous with a bad movie. I will rewatch Dead Reckoning ( and later Pt 2 ) certainly more times in the future than I will ever rewatch Oppenheimer or Barbie.
I liked MI:DR, but it was a step down from Fallout and the box office reflected that. I saw Dead Reckoning on the Tuesday before Barbenheimer dropped and there were only 4 other people in the theater. It had a 9 day head without any competition and ticket sales lagged behind Fallout every single day. General audiences just didn’t connect with it that strongly.
It will always depress me that because of Cutthroat Island we never got what would’ve been the second Arnold Schwarzenegger/Paul Verhoeven collaboration, Crusade.
The Deer Hunter is a fantastic movie but you could still see the director's habit of making a film way longer than it needs to be. It did work with The Deer Hunter since the long first part made you attached to the characters. But five hours? Wow
With Megalopolis, you could feel the years that movie had been waiting to get made. There are elements that were meant to feel timeless, but instead came off as dated. As I was trying to explain the movie to my sisters, I realized that if Coppola had made Megalopolis in the 70s, it probably would’ve destroyed his career. Still, I could see Megalopolis being reassessed as a noble failure but never being called genuinely good.
Just found out that Megalopolis (another Francis Ford Coppola film) grossed 13 million USD on a 136 million USD budget. Wonder if this flop will be enough to sink the studio or Lionsgate?
Coppola self funded it and he's pretty rich, so he should be fine. I think Lionsgate only assumed a few million in risk (if any - Coppola put up most of the marketing himself, I think). It was a bad financial move for Coppola, that's for sure. But Joker 2 surmounted its floppiness a week later lol
If I remember correctly, Sakaguchi said about Spirits Within (and I may be wrong); "If for a moment while you are watching, you are convinced the CGI characters are real, I have done my job." And didn't Square Pictures do Advent Children as well, with the few embers they had left?..
They also did one of the segments of The Matrix Animated movie anthology. Fantastic segment which really showcased the work we could have gotten from them if things had turned out differently.
I think Sakaguchi did his job. Sure, if you look long enough, it's obviously CGI but I think there are moments - especially on watching it when younger - that it would pass a reality. Advent Children was produced by one of Square Enix's divisions, but wasn't necessarily Square Pictures, which was its own company (and predated Square Enix).
And don't forget Terminator 2 which if I remember correctly was the most expensive movie ever made at that time. At this point you have to admire the guy, because it seems that a segment of people almost wish for his films to fail; which is funny because 3 of Cameron's films are in the list of top 10 highest grossing films of all time. Clearly he knows what the general movie goer wants.
They have a huge number of successes, too. Every $2 billion dollar movie is owned by Disney, and they're 8 of the top 10 highest grossing movies, too. The company prints money like no tomorrow.
Chuck Jones, legendary Looney Tunes animator/director, penned an animated film script with his wife called GAY PURR-EE (1962), and wanted to work with the animation studio United Productions of America on it, who he'd been fanboying over for yrs. Problem was: because he was tied to Looney Tunes, he signed an exclusivity contract w Warner Bros barring him from working outside the studio for anyone else. So, as covert as he could, he lended his hand on story, design, and bits of animation on the film that he wanted for UPA to maintain relationship. The film was finished, but lacked the distribution for theaters, until one studio scooped it up . . . which was Warner Bros. Jones was found out immediately, terminated from studio/working on Looney Tunes, and the film itself bombed so hard that UPA was forced to shutdown it's animation division and sold off assets to another buyer (rumored to have been sabotaged by WB as "punishment")
"Gay Pur-ree" (1962) was distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures, a Time Warner Company since 2003. The troubled production was co-produced by UPA (1941-2000), which has now folded into DreamWorks Classics (2000-present) under Universal Studios.
Surprised you haven’t put Happy Madison Productions on this list considering almost every single film they fart out flops miserably. And they lose money by the millions on each one they release. Not one makes any kind of profit whatsoever.
I think The Dark Is Rising, City of Ember, and I Am Number Four. Should be left alone as one adaptation. I like it when their original adaptations, deviate from the source material. And become their own thing. I appreciate it more on a re-watch. These films do indeed show humor, flaws, emotion, and heart. Those films do have creativity after all. A remake won't be needed at all. Since, it's not saying that much. Creativity is sorely lacking nowadays. I know they aren't liked by everyone, but it has it's moments. Due to the use of woke culture since 2015. I enjoy the early 2010's. Since this was still a part of the classic Hollywood Era. Those three films should not be remade.
I will always defend Cutthroat Island as fun and ambitious, it is filled with with wild stunts (rolling out a window and landing in a moving carriage seat) and amazing effects. We will never get set pieces like two large wooden ships in battle ever again.
I've a soft spot for action-adventure movies myself, especially if they're pirate movies. We don't get enough of these kinds of movies anymore, which is a shame. More swashbuckling is always a good thing.
If they based on it like Monkey Island series (with Geena Davis as Governor Marley and Modine as Guybrush Threepwood), they could have headed Disney off the pass. XD
Heaven's Gate did not cause UA to go bust. There's a doc on this site that explains that it broke even because of insurance / pre sales to TV companies, etc.
The reason The Golden Compass was a failure was the cowardice of the filmmakers. Cutting the dark ending killed the story. Along with the softning of characters..HBO did a great job with the same story.. Also why would you claim oone story is better. Your wrong.
"Raise the Titanic' was an infamous disaster. It's available for viewing on you-tube and it's actually a good film that accomplished some things before Cameron did them. The actual raising of the ship is one of the greatest movie moments of all time that few people will ever see.
In fairness, you say that Cutthroat Island basically killed pirate movies until Pirates of the Carribean came along...that particular sub-genre had been largely absent from the big screen at that point, for years (if not decades). I don't count Hook...it wasn't a movie about pirates, it was a movie about Peter Pan that happened to contain pirates in the story. That was one of the reasons CI was considered to be worth the gamble...it was revisiting an old favorite film-type, with a big budget and updated effects. It was also, however, not a particularly strong script...the plot was standard fare for what you'd expect from a pirate movie, but the dialogue was, with few exceptions, lackluster. It didn't help that you had Geena Davis speaking with absolutely perfect diction while almost everyone else in the film had some kind of vocal affectation that indicated their status...Matthew Modine didn't really nail a British accent, but he at least adjusted his speaking cadence to fit hint at a British background, Frank Langella put a TON of extra rasp in his voice...but when everyone else in the movie passes as either a British sailor or officer, or as a pirate with a British background, and your two leads have no British accent at all, it's jarring and pulls you out of the movie. It stops feeling like you're watching a pirate movie and feels like you're watching two actors play "Pirates", with a very capable backing cast.
I always thought a movie would be considered “successful” if it makes back more than what it cost to make and call it a day. For example: making $20 million at the box office on a $10 million budget.
Unfortunately, you can usually 1.5x-2x a stated budget, as marketing costs are usually not factored in. And as most larger production companies are also distributors (Disney, Universal, WB, etc.), they cover production + marketing. Then, there are the theatrical splits to deal with + backend deals. Sometimes, they also sign away foreign rights to help cover the budget. Usually, a movie needs to make 2.5-3x its budget in order to just break even. So, to cover costs, a $10 million movie might need to make $25-$30m before the production company makes anything. That said, all of this is kept very under wraps, so the breakeven for any given movie can vary.
Spirits Within is a tragedy in retrospect. I remember seeing it in theaters when i was 6 and having no idea if I was seeing real people or CGI 😂 Imagine what Square could have continued to do in games with Sakaguchi and without Enix.
It's one of the tragedies of being a pioneer - at the time, a lot of people won't understand what you're going for and will critique it based on the understanding they already have instead of trying to come to terms with the author on what they were trying to convey and how they conveyed it.
Heaven's Gate will ALWAYS be debatable . The Z Channel was like the only movie cable channel that played the director's cut of Heaven's Gate and got great reviews from the subscribers . The main reason it lost money is for the long running time .
@@bobrew461 Heaven's Gate was very splendid and glorious when Michael Cimino's troubled epic has opened on Wednesday, November 19, 1980 and a year later, it was been nominated for an 1982 Oscar for best achievement in art direction-set decoration (Tambi Larsen, Spencer Deverill, Maurice Fowler; James I. Berkey, Josie MacAvin). Rights were now owned by SPT, a SPE Company (Fall 1985-present). The Oscar nominated epic was aired on KTLA 5/Los Angeles in January of 1988. Enjoy!
Im so sorry but i cant understand what you are saying in this video. I dont know if its low volume, bad audio quality or your accent but u really should have added subtitles for this
Fair criticism. It's mostly quality as I don't really have a well treated room. I'm hoping to get that done by the end of the month. At the very least, it'll help me narrow down the exact issue.
@@koira1 I actually read the book Final Cut, which was mentioned in this video. I really was hoping to like the film Heaven’s Gate, but I agree with Stephen Bach. Siskel & Ebert’s review, if you ever see their review, sums up my feelings towards the film as well. Studios never trusted the director again. All because Michael Cimino sunk the studio.
In some cases you haven't noticed..."Mountains of the Moon" was developed and produced by Zephyr Films for Studio Canal, distributed by Columbia Pictures, a SPE Company in 1990. In 1991, the cult biography film won the Evening Standard British Film Award. Since August 15, 1992, the TV syndication rights of the film were now currently owned by CBS Television Distribution, under license from Trifecta Entertainment and Media. It aired on A&E, BET, AMC, Bravo, Lifetime, PBS, Movies, FX, Bounce, The 365, Telemundo, Telexitos, TBS, TNT, TCM, Oxygen, USA, WEtv, WGN, USA and History. Enjoy!
This makes me hope that they would consider remastering it in UE5. Probably wouldn't be cheap, but I think it could make for an excellent concept - and concepts like that are important to show what the future will be like.
What Carolco has now folded into StudioCanal in 1998, whose credits were The Silent Partner, The Changeling, The Rambo Trilogy, Basic Instinct, Total Recall, Universal Soldier, Stargate, Cliffhanger, China Moon among others.
Treasure plant flopped it came out before curse of the black pearl came out. Though it’s a much more appreciated and respected Disney film now I’ve heard. I disagree I some of think new lines low budget film was good especially a certain low budget horror anthology series. Off which new line sadly did not make our distribute its most recent 5 film in the franchise which sadly I think killed the franchise because it was not good enough the acting was to bad the characters were unlikeable at least they keep the fury vicious little beast practical effects.
The strange thing is that Heavens Gate is a much better movie than The Deer Hunter. Heavens Gate is pretty entertaining, and beautifully shot, but The Deer Hunter is borderline unwatchable. I know people had different tastes then, but there's no way there were that many masochists willing to sit through 3 hours of pretentious, depressing nothingness, just to brag that they did it.
Don’t forget the second wonder women and birds of prey flooped really hard also I think the suicide squad did floop theatrical the r rated film verision that I think Weaton made and was not canon with the other dcu film were they thought a giant star fish monster our something like that at the end. Booooooooooooooooo that’s not fair our gigantic aquatic monster a really big squid got caught from out of the film version of our comic. Lol
Suggestion: directors that failed to expectation after a sucess movie. Like Richard Kelly with soutland tales, Vincent Gallo with Brown bunny, Michael Cimino with Heavens gate and John Boorman with Zardoz.
That's a solid idea. Richard Kelly comes up quite a bit. I hope the guy gets another chance soon. I think he's got a lot more solid hits left in him and, much like Paul Thomas Anderson, studios should consider giving him a reasonable budget to make interesting movies.
@@SyntopikonSouthland Tales is a beautiful disaster, an acid trip of a movie, but mostly not in a good way.
There's a scene in it where two cars have sex. No real context, just an animated car commercial where one car mounts another one. The fact that such a thing made it to the final cut shows how big an ego the director had and how out of control the whole production was.
Boorman doubled down, following up Zardoz with the Exorcist II.
I’ve never liked Heaven’s Gate. It’s probably one of the most bloated films ever made. There are some good visuals however.
The Spirits Within was, I thought, really good. I was disappointed it didn't find an audience.
It has a lot of cool stuff but it is crammed airtight and it just moves on instead of breathing
I think part of that is budgetary constraints. Animation is still notoriously expensive and this was a first-of-its-kind sort of thing. Another minute could've been millions and it had already gone so overbudget.
@@volodymyrbilyk555there was even a cut storyline regarding Aki finding one of the spirits that came from a child I think it was and it would have added some to the story.
It had an audience, but that audience was not monetizable yet. It was sad for all of us.
To be fair, Cutthroat Island is not a bad movie. That is not to say that it's a great film by any means, but it's not terrible. It's a mediocre adventure film that has its high spots and its low spots and that is fairly enjoyable to watch. Neither Renny nor Geena nor the studio deserved the massive hit they took because of that film.
I think that Harlin and especially Davis didn't deserve it (I think stars rarely deserve the blame for a movie underperforming outside of a truly bad performance - and, happily, both seem to making something of a comeback), but I can't say the same for Carolco only because I think the risk they took was more of a gamble as opposed to a measured risk. I think they saw how well Hook did a few years prior and wanted to replicate its success but were unable to.
@@Syntopikon I have to say, I don't even remember the movie coming out and I was of an age at the time where I would've been the target audience for the film, but it strikes me as the kind of movie that people would've come out to see. Undoubtedly the trailers would've made it look like fun escapism and it features actors, and a director, who were hot at the time. So the main question in my mind is why didn't audiences show up.
In regard to Renny, I watched his most recent film The Bricklayer and it was . . . okay. Aaron Eckhart did surprisingly well with the action scenes (especially considering his age and the fact that he's not traditionally known as an action guy) and there was some good action choreography, but it was otherwise a pretty generic straight-to-video kind of film. I also saw his Hercules movie a few years back and it was LAUGHABLY bad. Honestly, I'm not sure what happened to the guy. I go back and watch films like Die Hard 2, The Long Kiss Goodnight (super-underrated BTW) and Cliffhanger, and I think to myself, "Why can't you just do THAT again?" Just do the thing that you've already shown that you can do!
I sorrrrrt of agree... Harlin actually deserves a chunk of the blame. As a director he strikes me as capable, but not particularly remarkable. He's not the sort of director I'd gamble on, and it was his ambition without vision that makes Cutthroat so... Meh. His filmography is full of films that, at best, only seem to have potential. His filmography would be great if it were handled by other directors.
@@RandJohnson If you haven't seen The Long Kiss Goodnight, you should check it out. It's one of the most fun action movies I've ever seen and it was largely ignored upon release.
@@sorenpx I believe I did. Isn't that the amnesiac sleeper assassin movie? I recall there being a pretty amazing car crash scene in the beginning. It's still felt like a regular old Hollywood film to me though. I wouldn't call my cell phone snob but I have a very difficult time enjoying purposeful blockbusters like Michael Bay movies. He's just not the kind of director I care much about. I'd rather see an action film by someone like Alex Garland because there are themes and motifs whereas this guy's films feel sort of artless and more showy. He's just not my guy hahaha
Here is a significant correction regarding film budgets. Using Final Fantasy as the example, the film cost $137 million; this cost does NOT include the marketing budget nor the film studio. $137 million was the film's production cost, with no ancillary costs. If you include the cost of the studio and marketing, The Spirits Within skyrocketed to $212 million. Since theatre chains take about half of a movie's box office as their cut to screen a film, TSW needed to earn approximately $430 million to break even. What this means is Final Fantasy The Spirits Within wasn't just a flop, it was a catastrophe for Square, who lost -$127 million.
The moral of the story - sometimes things don't work out
I was amazed at the small amount of marketing that was done for this film considering it's budget. Most films today have marketing costs that are generally 50% of the actual budget of the film. Maybe this wasn't the case then, but that figure was the first thing that hit me.
I'm noticing a theme: all of these movies have redeeming qualities and a respectable number of supporters. I imagine that it's because no movie that is truly, obviously terrible is going to receive enough money to sink a studio, as well as the fact that simply pouring more money on can improve certain aspects of a film.
I think that's fairly accurate. Studios are in the business of making money and none of them - outside of passion projects, which usually get small budgets anyways - will fund a movie they think will fail either at the box office or at getting awards (which is why they'll fund, say Paul Thomas Anderson - his movies don't make much money, but are prestigious). And a lot of these movies do find an audience, it's just after the initial release. I think the issues really arises when people are unable to discern whether a particular problem is fixable with money (like a technical issue) or if it's more fundamental than that (a creative issue).
😂
Should consider the fiasco of Cleopatra, probably the most expensive film made when adjusted.
Made for $77 000 000 in 1963, would now cost almost $800 000 000. Not bad, but 20th Century was saved by The Sound of Music a couple of years later.
Oh, and Taylor made $7 000 000 then, now almost $80 000 000. Must be one of the best paid actors of Hollywood.
thank you. came here to say this.
@@JefferyFrisoneGood for her! ❤
I know you're trying to appeal to new viewers, but I swear to God its like you say the same 3 sentences every other video about certain movies. Like yes we get that Weinstein had bad ideas about how many movies LotR should be you only mention it ONCE PER VIDEO. Same with klaus kinski and all that. Why not just say 3 words about it and then link to a video where you talked about it. I don't wanna constantly be skipping you constantly repeating yourself.
I just watched another of his videos before this, and thought I'd clicked on the same one again!
Agreed
You better watch your mouth, i got hired to clean up the negative females in the comments. Come at me bro!!!!
In 1956, both Ray Stark and Martin Jurow were forming Rastar. From 1957 through 2000, the legendary duo have either producing,
developing and financing a string of hits and sleepers such as Funny Girl, The Owl and the Pussycat, The Way We Were, Summer Wishes Winter Dreams, Funny Lady,
The Sunshine Boys, Smokey & the Bandit 1 and 2, Hot Stuff, The Competition, Annie, The Toy, Blue Thunder, No Small Affair, Sylvester,
Nothing in Common, Peggy Sue Got Married, The Secret of My Success, Biloxi Blues, Funny About Love, All I Want for Christmas, L.A. Story,
Harriet the Spy, Random Hearts and their final production was The Whole Nine Yards. As of 2001, Rastar has becoming an in-name-only unit of
Hallmark Cards since 1986.
I’ve only just picked up today your channel. But can’t stop watching your videos. Everything you do is excellent and so well researched. I think this is one of the best channels on UA-cam … EVER. and I like a lot of this type of videos. I do hope the industry is watching your stuff .. but somehow I feel like you are part of the industry. But I love it!! Well done.
I'm glad you enjoy the videos, and thank you so much for the sincere, kind words! I hope you enjoy future videos, too.
I can’t recall the Storyline of FF, but the Images sure left a Mark. Ahead of its Time.
That's the mark of an important movie: some of it always sticks with you.
The major problem of The Spirits Within, which anybody who has ever played the games can tell you, is that it is not a Final Fantasy story. If just an iota of all that talent and technology had been put into the adaptation of a true FF story, not only would people remember the storyline, but the film would most likely be remembered today as a major benchmark in cinema history rather than as a film that bankrupted a studio.
The storyline off the top of my head? It was about these entities (spirits) that could kill people if they touched them and the heroine is a doctor trying to work out what they are and thinks they are not dangerous as they are supposed to be when the villain military wants to engineer a military coup so he can wipe the spirits out and basically causes a breach in a city's shield that stops spirits out so that he can march in with troops, kill the spirits, save the day and demonstrates the spirits need to be nuked. Unfortunately, the spirits break in, kill everyone in the city except for the doctor and some troops who fight their way out (inc. the military commanded who did it all) . The doctor finds out that the spirts are basically trying to defend the land and she works out how to calm the spirits down but the military commander, guilty about killing a lot of innocent people, wants to use a honking big space gun to hit the location where the doctor is because it will wipe the spirits out. I can't remember the rest here but the doctor survives and her gang dies and the spirits are calmed. It got real boring for me but I remember all the top off my head. XD
@@NelsonStJames I agree. I remember I watched it when I was a kid and was completely confused because it was nothing like a Final Fantasy. Sometimes tying yourself to a popular brandname can be a weight around your kneck instead of a boost. I think it may have done marginally better, at least in the long run, if it had just been called The Spirits Within. Instead it doomed itself to always kinda be the "non-Final Fantasy Final Fantasy" project and struggles to have its own identity; hence why I think its been mostly forgotten.
Sure it was always going to have an uphill battle due to its disastrous performance but the unclear intent caused by the shoehornig in of the FF brand really harmed its prospect of being a cult movie of any significance. Which is a shame because it isnt *that* bad, especially given it was a new method in the industry being employed. Either commit to the FF thing completely doing either fantasy or VII/VIII's tecno-fantasy thing with the familiar elements or just seperate entirely.
Love the videos, man. Keep it up!!!
Thanks - and will do! 🤘
Just wanted to comment that these videos are really well made and interesting. Keep it up!
Thanks! I appreciate it.
Heaven's Gate is 3.5 hours of my life I'll never get back. I loved it when Siskel and Ebert were utterly savage over their criticisms of the film. I think the biggest problem was that Cimino had a hit with The Deer Hunter, then things went to his head. Heaven's Gate was the result. My biggest problem is that people use Heaven's Gate as an excuse to trash The Deer Hunter, which I think is one of the most gut wrenching films I've ever seen.
The problems of Heavens Gate are also present in The Deer Hunter
@@koira1 Examples?
@@johnfitzpatrick3094 De Niro goes in nam and just accidentally finds Walken
@koira1 De Niro was looking for him. That wasn't an accident. On the other hand, all three of them at the same POW camp is far fetched, but the movie is so intense, you don't think about that.
@@johnfitzpatrick3094 The problems of it become really obvius after a rewatch
Heaven's Gate is a pretty okay movie when you get past the ridiculous runtime, but man did Cimino's ego get the best of him.
Part of me does want to see what that massive rough cut was like. I can only imagine what was going through the producers minds when they saw that *this* is what Cimino really wanted, and they needed to knock off another 2-3 hours.
The problem is, way too much time and money was invested into a movie for it to be merely "pretty okay."
Cimino played fast and loose just as everyone kinda got fed up with studio directors playing auteur. Same thing happened to Friedkin but he figured the way out and his latter films were some boss shit, while Cimino never just faded away after running on empty for like a decade.
18:15 it was at this moment I realized I fucked up and was confusing The Ninth Gate with Heaven's Gate... and was silently(until now) wondering that there was a film Depp made that bankrupted a studio. I only remember Depp bankrupting himself.
Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning underperforming is one of the most heartbreaking ones for me. Just an amazing movie from start to finish. Deserved to make as much as Barbie and Oppenheimer (not saying they stole its business though or that I don’t like them).
I think the issues were 2 fold:
1. It came out around the time of Barbie & Oppenheimer, but did not benefit at all from the marketing the other two had. Their marketing sucked the wind out of pretty much every other movie.
2. The Part 1 was a mistake, I think. They should've just given it a regular title but put something at the end - like Marvel movies do - that the story will continue in the next installation. Like how Fast and Furious didn't do "Fast X: Part 1" - it was just Fast X. I think if they called it "Mission Impossible 7: Dead Reckoning", it would've done a bit better.
But yeah, I really wish the movie the did a lot better. Mission Impossible has been on a roll since Ghost Protocol, doing some of the best action-thriller work of the last 10 years.
@@Syntopikon agreed with everything you just said!
That was an absolute shame, since I believe in the long run Dead Reckoning will stand the test of time (at least more than Barbie) . Hype can certainly help a film, but it doesn't necessarily sustain it. Also fallout from covid hurt MI 7; if this had come out in pre covid theaters I believe it would have done far better, and I believe MI 8 is going to more than make up for it. Maybe they will even re-release it for a short time in theaters before the release of part 2 since it will have been quite a wait by that time. Nevertheless nobody involved in the film has anything to be ashamed of; very good pictures will flop at the box-office occasionally for a myriad of reasons. The failure of a movie at the box-office is not synonymous with a bad movie. I will rewatch Dead Reckoning ( and later Pt 2 ) certainly more times in the future than I will ever rewatch Oppenheimer or Barbie.
@@NelsonStJames yes!
I liked MI:DR, but it was a step down from Fallout and the box office reflected that. I saw Dead Reckoning on the Tuesday before Barbenheimer dropped and there were only 4 other people in the theater. It had a 9 day head without any competition and ticket sales lagged behind Fallout every single day. General audiences just didn’t connect with it that strongly.
It will always depress me that because of Cutthroat Island we never got what would’ve been the second Arnold Schwarzenegger/Paul Verhoeven collaboration, Crusade.
Look, I don't know what the hell you're talking about. I'm sorry, okay?
The Deer Hunter is a fantastic movie but you could still see the director's habit of making a film way longer than it needs to be. It did work with The Deer Hunter since the long first part made you attached to the characters. But five hours? Wow
With Megalopolis, you could feel the years that movie had been waiting to get made. There are elements that were meant to feel timeless, but instead came off as dated. As I was trying to explain the movie to my sisters, I realized that if Coppola had made Megalopolis in the 70s, it probably would’ve destroyed his career. Still, I could see Megalopolis being reassessed as a noble failure but never being called genuinely good.
Just found out that Megalopolis (another Francis Ford Coppola film) grossed 13 million USD on a 136 million USD budget. Wonder if this flop will be enough to sink the studio or Lionsgate?
Coppola self funded it and he's pretty rich, so he should be fine. I think Lionsgate only assumed a few million in risk (if any - Coppola put up most of the marketing himself, I think). It was a bad financial move for Coppola, that's for sure. But Joker 2 surmounted its floppiness a week later lol
I mistrust films that have the word "heaven's" or "gate" in the title.
A wise decision. Incidentally, whenever you goggle it, you need to add "film" or "movie" to get that result. Otherwise, it's just about the cult.
I initially thought it was about the cult and was wondering why tf do you need horses and five hours for it 😭😭💀
Great strip club name 😏 just saying
If I remember correctly, Sakaguchi said about Spirits Within (and I may be wrong);
"If for a moment while you are watching, you are convinced the CGI characters are real, I have done my job."
And didn't Square Pictures do Advent Children as well, with the few embers they had left?..
They also did one of the segments of The Matrix Animated movie anthology. Fantastic segment which really showcased the work we could have gotten from them if things had turned out differently.
I think Sakaguchi did his job. Sure, if you look long enough, it's obviously CGI but I think there are moments - especially on watching it when younger - that it would pass a reality.
Advent Children was produced by one of Square Enix's divisions, but wasn't necessarily Square Pictures, which was its own company (and predated Square Enix).
It's absolutely amazing that James Cameron hasn't made a list like this yet.
He's defied the odds at least 3 times: Titanic, Avatar, and Avatar 2. Possibly even True Lies.
And don't forget Terminator 2 which if I remember correctly was the most expensive movie ever made at that time.
At this point you have to admire the guy, because it seems that a segment of people almost wish for his films to fail; which is funny because 3 of Cameron's films are in the list of top 10 highest grossing films of all time. Clearly he knows what the general movie goer wants.
I don't understand. Avatar and Titanic were succesful.
@@KapiteinKrentebol They're basically saying that Cameron's movies are so expensive, it's amazing none of them flopped hard enough to end a studio.
@@Syntopikon
His flop back in 1989 called Abyss nearly broke a certain studio.
How is it that Disney isn't bankrupt after numerous massive-loss films?
They have a huge number of successes, too. Every $2 billion dollar movie is owned by Disney, and they're 8 of the top 10 highest grossing movies, too. The company prints money like no tomorrow.
Remember, you have Kathleen Kennedy in the background.
Disney is a conglomerate that's broken into numerous sub companies. Many of disneys animation studios did close and shutdown
Because, unlike most other studios, they have Disney land and merchandise.
Merch
Games
Disney land /world
Mcu
Cartoons
Tv
Etc
They'll never go broke
It's the Amazon of Entertainment
Chuck Jones, legendary Looney Tunes animator/director, penned an animated film script with his wife called GAY PURR-EE (1962), and wanted to work with the animation studio United Productions of America on it, who he'd been fanboying over for yrs. Problem was: because he was tied to Looney Tunes, he signed an exclusivity contract w Warner Bros barring him from working outside the studio for anyone else. So, as covert as he could, he lended his hand on story, design, and bits of animation on the film that he wanted for UPA to maintain relationship. The film was finished, but lacked the distribution for theaters, until one studio scooped it up . . . which was Warner Bros.
Jones was found out immediately, terminated from studio/working on Looney Tunes, and the film itself bombed so hard that UPA was forced to shutdown it's animation division and sold off assets to another buyer (rumored to have been sabotaged by WB as "punishment")
"Gay Pur-ree" (1962) was distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures, a Time Warner Company since 2003.
The troubled production was co-produced by UPA (1941-2000), which has now folded into
DreamWorks Classics (2000-present) under Universal Studios.
Surprised you haven’t put Happy Madison Productions on this list considering almost every single film they fart out flops miserably. And they lose money by the millions on each one they release. Not one makes any kind of profit whatsoever.
i like your analyses, keep the good videos coming, maybe get some diction courses but overall love your content.
I appreciate the kind words and the constructive feedback!
His diction is fine, but as with most UA-camrs, he should remove the background music.
I think The Dark Is Rising, City of Ember, and I Am Number Four. Should be left alone as one adaptation. I like it when their original adaptations, deviate from the source material. And become their own thing. I appreciate it more on a re-watch. These films do indeed show humor, flaws, emotion, and heart. Those films do have creativity after all. A remake won't be needed at all. Since, it's not saying that much. Creativity is sorely lacking nowadays. I know they aren't liked by everyone, but it has it's moments. Due to the use of woke culture since 2015. I enjoy the early 2010's. Since this was still a part of the classic Hollywood Era. Those three films should not be remade.
I will always defend Cutthroat Island as fun and ambitious, it is filled with with wild stunts (rolling out a window and landing in a moving carriage seat) and amazing effects. We will never get set pieces like two large wooden ships in battle ever again.
Master and commander did that a couple of years later featuring peak Russell Crow being basically Captain Kirk
Also perhaps the best of the seafaring movies excluding POTC.
I've a soft spot for action-adventure movies myself, especially if they're pirate movies. We don't get enough of these kinds of movies anymore, which is a shame. More swashbuckling is always a good thing.
@@Syntopikon except for that pirate movie that Polanski made. Dude just doesn't have it in him
If they based on it like Monkey Island series (with Geena Davis as Governor Marley and Modine as Guybrush Threepwood), they could have headed Disney off the pass. XD
You have 13:46 One From The Heat almost ended Zoetrope listed but I believe the film was called One from the Heart.
Today, the American Zoetrope library of television and movies were currently owned by Lionsgate/StudioCanal in September 1994.
Heaven's Gate did not cause UA to go bust.
There's a doc on this site that explains that it broke even
because of insurance / pre sales to TV companies, etc.
I always thought the sequel to "First Blood" should have been called "Second Blood".
Lol it would've made more sense.
@@Syntopikon Lots of Blood.
The reason The Golden Compass was a failure was the cowardice of the filmmakers. Cutting the dark ending killed the story. Along with the softning of characters..HBO
did a great job with the same
story.. Also why would you claim oone story is better. Your wrong.
"Raise the Titanic' was an infamous disaster. It's available for viewing on you-tube and it's actually a good film that accomplished some things before Cameron did them. The actual raising of the ship is one of the greatest movie moments of all time that few people will ever see.
Interesting fact: the black guy from “final fantasy” was later reused for the ANIMATRIX “final flight of the Osiris.”
If nothing else, you love to say "if nothing else." 😂 JK, man. Love the video.
Lol I definitely have particular turns of phrase I enjoy.
In fairness, you say that Cutthroat Island basically killed pirate movies until Pirates of the Carribean came along...that particular sub-genre had been largely absent from the big screen at that point, for years (if not decades). I don't count Hook...it wasn't a movie about pirates, it was a movie about Peter Pan that happened to contain pirates in the story. That was one of the reasons CI was considered to be worth the gamble...it was revisiting an old favorite film-type, with a big budget and updated effects.
It was also, however, not a particularly strong script...the plot was standard fare for what you'd expect from a pirate movie, but the dialogue was, with few exceptions, lackluster. It didn't help that you had Geena Davis speaking with absolutely perfect diction while almost everyone else in the film had some kind of vocal affectation that indicated their status...Matthew Modine didn't really nail a British accent, but he at least adjusted his speaking cadence to fit hint at a British background, Frank Langella put a TON of extra rasp in his voice...but when everyone else in the movie passes as either a British sailor or officer, or as a pirate with a British background, and your two leads have no British accent at all, it's jarring and pulls you out of the movie. It stops feeling like you're watching a pirate movie and feels like you're watching two actors play "Pirates", with a very capable backing cast.
I always thought a movie would be considered “successful” if it makes back more than what it cost to make and call it a day. For example: making $20 million at the box office on a $10 million budget.
Unfortunately, you can usually 1.5x-2x a stated budget, as marketing costs are usually not factored in. And as most larger production companies are also distributors (Disney, Universal, WB, etc.), they cover production + marketing. Then, there are the theatrical splits to deal with + backend deals. Sometimes, they also sign away foreign rights to help cover the budget. Usually, a movie needs to make 2.5-3x its budget in order to just break even. So, to cover costs, a $10 million movie might need to make $25-$30m before the production company makes anything. That said, all of this is kept very under wraps, so the breakeven for any given movie can vary.
"box office" does not mean "income".
the movie studio is not going to tell anyone their income
If you can't make money with a Gina Davis movie, you can't make money.
Spirits Within is a tragedy in retrospect. I remember seeing it in theaters when i was 6 and having no idea if I was seeing real people or CGI 😂 Imagine what Square could have continued to do in games with Sakaguchi and without Enix.
It's one of the tragedies of being a pioneer - at the time, a lot of people won't understand what you're going for and will critique it based on the understanding they already have instead of trying to come to terms with the author on what they were trying to convey and how they conveyed it.
Heaven's Gate will ALWAYS be debatable . The Z Channel was like the only movie cable channel that played the director's cut of Heaven's Gate and got great reviews from the subscribers . The main reason it lost money is for the long running time .
it didn't lose money.
@@bobrew461 Heaven's Gate was very
splendid and glorious when Michael
Cimino's troubled epic has opened
on Wednesday, November 19, 1980
and a year later, it was been nominated
for an 1982 Oscar for best achievement
in art direction-set decoration
(Tambi Larsen, Spencer Deverill,
Maurice Fowler; James I. Berkey,
Josie MacAvin). Rights were now
owned by SPT, a SPE Company
(Fall 1985-present).
The Oscar nominated epic was aired
on KTLA 5/Los Angeles in January
of 1988. Enjoy!
Spirits Within in a way predicted V Tubers with its animated actors idea
Huh. Never looked at it that way, but it sounds fairly accurate considering it was entirely motion capture as (I imagine) all V Tubers are.
Heaven's Gate could be edited down to a decent movie.
Im so sorry but i cant understand what you are saying in this video. I dont know if its low volume, bad audio quality or your accent but u really should have added subtitles for this
Fair criticism. It's mostly quality as I don't really have a well treated room. I'm hoping to get that done by the end of the month. At the very least, it'll help me narrow down the exact issue.
@@Syntopikon i really want this to be good thats why i gave you this comment. otherwise i would just click off this video
i still believe that cutthroat island is a great pirate movie that holds it's own
Heaven’s Gate sucked. So boring.
Yeah absolutely
Breaks my heart to hear that
@@koira1 I actually read the book Final Cut, which was mentioned in this video. I really was hoping to like the film Heaven’s Gate, but I agree with Stephen Bach. Siskel & Ebert’s review, if you ever see their review, sums up my feelings towards the film as well. Studios never trusted the director again. All because Michael Cimino sunk the studio.
Costner may do it again.
@@leewright1 Kevins Gate
We quite enjoyed "Cutthroat Island" and have a copy of our own. Oh well ...
Dungeons and dragons and oblivion are good movies though..
D&D was just too generic for me but not bad
I think most audiences have outgrown basic fantasy flicks
Also the "MCU" Type humour did not help
What the hell is "person years"?
CarolCo made Mountains of the Moon? Good for them. That was a great movie.
In some cases you haven't noticed..."Mountains of the Moon" was developed and produced by Zephyr Films for Studio Canal, distributed by Columbia Pictures, a SPE Company
in 1990. In 1991, the cult biography film won the Evening Standard British Film Award. Since August 15, 1992, the TV syndication rights of the film were now currently owned by CBS Television Distribution, under license from Trifecta Entertainment and Media.
It aired on A&E, BET, AMC, Bravo, Lifetime, PBS, Movies, FX, Bounce, The 365, Telemundo, Telexitos, TBS, TNT, TCM, Oxygen, USA, WEtv, WGN, USA and History. Enjoy!
Imagine if The Spirits Within was made with UE5.
This makes me hope that they would consider remastering it in UE5. Probably wouldn't be cheap, but I think it could make for an excellent concept - and concepts like that are important to show what the future will be like.
It is incredible when you think that today an individual in their basement can do in film what was considered groundbreaking less than 25 years ago.
Feel bad for Carlaco
What Carolco has now folded into StudioCanal in 1998, whose credits were The Silent Partner, The Changeling, The Rambo Trilogy, Basic Instinct, Total Recall,
Universal Soldier, Stargate, Cliffhanger, China Moon among others.
Great video idea would be the A24 films that failed we usually hear about their successes but barely their failures
Treasure plant flopped it came out before curse of the black pearl came out. Though it’s a much more appreciated and respected Disney film now I’ve heard. I disagree I some of think new lines low budget film was good especially a certain low budget horror anthology series. Off which new line sadly did not make our distribute its most recent 5 film in the franchise which sadly I think killed the franchise because it was not good enough the acting was to bad the characters were unlikeable at least they keep the fury vicious little beast practical effects.
Forget spirts with in we have adventtttttt childreennnnn! Now. Lol
The strange thing is that Heavens Gate is a much better movie than The Deer Hunter. Heavens Gate is pretty entertaining, and beautifully shot, but The Deer Hunter is borderline unwatchable. I know people had different tastes then, but there's no way there were that many masochists willing to sit through 3 hours of pretentious, depressing nothingness, just to brag that they did it.
Look at FF7 and compare it to the animation of this movie.
Don’t forget the second wonder women and birds of prey flooped really hard also I think the suicide squad did floop theatrical the r rated film verision that I think Weaton made and was not canon with the other dcu film were they thought a giant star fish monster our something like that at the end. Booooooooooooooooo that’s not fair our gigantic aquatic monster a really big squid got caught from out of the film version of our comic. Lol
😲😲😲
Either your mic or your audio mixing is buggared, dude.
Sort it or speak clearer and enunciate better.
Really love heaven’s gate.
I thought dial of destiny was great. Dont understand the hate.
A Woman is in it as an actual character that makes certain folks
Uncomfortable
They can't even aprouch one
The budget for the first Harry Potter movie was $150,000,000; but no one mentions that because the film made money!🫢
That's what mattered.
So it did its job? How is that bad?